Process evaluation of an intervention to test the effectiveness of foam border dressings in preventing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injuries (the EEPOC trial): A protocol.

Fidelity Medical Pressure injury Pressure ulcer Process evaluation Prophylactic dressings Protocol Randomised controlled trial Sacral Surgical

Journal

Journal of tissue viability
ISSN: 0965-206X
Titre abrégé: J Tissue Viability
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9306822

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Historique:
received: 26 07 2021
revised: 07 11 2021
accepted: 11 11 2021
pubmed: 24 11 2021
medline: 16 2 2022
entrez: 23 11 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Prophylactic foam border dressings are recommended for high-risk patients in addition to standard pressure injury prevention protocols despite limited high-quality evidence regarding their effectiveness. This protocol describes the process evaluation that will be undertaken alongside a multisite randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of these dressings in reducing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injury incidence. This theory informed parallel process evaluation using qualitative and quantitative methods will be undertaken in medical and surgical units. To evaluate fidelity, recruitment, reach, dose delivered and received, and context, process data will include: research nurses' self-reported adherence to intervention protocols; semi-structured interviews with participants and research nurses and focus groups with nursing staff; participants' satisfaction and comfort with the dressings and perceived level of participation in pressure injury prevention; and nurses' attitudes toward pressure injury prevention. The proportion of the target population recruited, participant characteristics, and adherence to intervention protocols will be reported using descriptive statistics. Chi square or t-tests will compare differences in demographic characteristics between groups, and non-participants, and multivariate modelling will investigate potential moderators on the trial outcomes. Analysis of qualitative data will be guided by the Framework Method, which provides a clear, systematic process for developing themes. This process evaluation will provide valuable insights into mechanisms of impact and contextual and moderating factors influencing trial outcomes. Process data will enhance reproducibility of the intervention and trustworthiness of findings, and inform clinicians, researchers, and policy makers about the extent to which foam border dressings can be feasibly implemented in clinical practice. ACTRN12619000763145p.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Prophylactic foam border dressings are recommended for high-risk patients in addition to standard pressure injury prevention protocols despite limited high-quality evidence regarding their effectiveness. This protocol describes the process evaluation that will be undertaken alongside a multisite randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of these dressings in reducing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injury incidence.
METHODS METHODS
This theory informed parallel process evaluation using qualitative and quantitative methods will be undertaken in medical and surgical units. To evaluate fidelity, recruitment, reach, dose delivered and received, and context, process data will include: research nurses' self-reported adherence to intervention protocols; semi-structured interviews with participants and research nurses and focus groups with nursing staff; participants' satisfaction and comfort with the dressings and perceived level of participation in pressure injury prevention; and nurses' attitudes toward pressure injury prevention. The proportion of the target population recruited, participant characteristics, and adherence to intervention protocols will be reported using descriptive statistics. Chi square or t-tests will compare differences in demographic characteristics between groups, and non-participants, and multivariate modelling will investigate potential moderators on the trial outcomes. Analysis of qualitative data will be guided by the Framework Method, which provides a clear, systematic process for developing themes.
DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS
This process evaluation will provide valuable insights into mechanisms of impact and contextual and moderating factors influencing trial outcomes. Process data will enhance reproducibility of the intervention and trustworthiness of findings, and inform clinicians, researchers, and policy makers about the extent to which foam border dressings can be feasibly implemented in clinical practice.
TRIAL REGISTRATION BACKGROUND
ACTRN12619000763145p.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34810060
pii: S0965-206X(21)00127-3
doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2021.11.003
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Clinical Trial Protocol Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

158-163

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Tissue Viability Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Ishtar Lockwood (I)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: i.lockwood@griffith.edu.au.

Rachel M Walker (RM)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Wendy Chaboyer (W)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Marie Cooke (M)

Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Jennifer A Whitty (JA)

Health Economics Group, Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Lukman Thalib (L)

Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul Aydın University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Sharon Latimer (S)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Jill Campbell (J)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Brigid M Gillespie (BM)

NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH