The purpose of this research study is to evaluate the effectiveness of short refresher sessions. "Pain Practice Change Boosters" given at regular intervals to sustain improved pain process (assessment and management) and clinical outcomes (pain intensity) achieved during a 15 month knowledge translation intervention, Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality (EPIQ), in 8 children's hospitals in Canada; and to determine the factors that affect that sustainability. The CIHR Team in Children's Pain (2006-2011) evaluated the effectiveness of the EPIQ intervention in 32 hospital units (4 units at each hospital site). 16 hospital units were allocated to the intervention group and 16 units continued with standard care. The current study focuses on the 16 hospital units that implemented the EPIQ intervention only.
This is an 8 hospital repeated measures Randomized Controlled Trial design using a centrally controlled cluster random allocation of units with stratification by hospital. The sample consisted of the 16 hospital units that implemented the EPIQ intervention in the CIHR Team in Children's Pain study. Randomization was restricted so there was one intervention unit and one standard care unit at each site. Outcomes were measured at 3 time points:12 months after the completion of the EPIQ intervention: Baseline (Time 1); 12 months following the implementation of the Booster intervention (Time 2); and 36 months following the implementation of the Booster intervention (Time 3), including the frequency and proportion of children receiving pain assessment and management strategies, children's pain intensity during painful procedures, and health care professionals' perceptions of the context of sustainability.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
3,907
See experimental arm for a description of the intervention
Stollery Chidlren's Hospital
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
BC Children's Hospital
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Children's Hospital Winnipeg
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
IWK Health Centre
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Montreal Children's Hospital
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
CHU St. Justine
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T1 (Baseline)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) (Estabrooks, 2011) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.
Time frame: T1 (Baseline)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.
Time frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.
Time frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T1 (Baseline)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).
Time frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.
Time frame: T1 (Baseline)
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.
Time frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.
Time frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.