Determinants of change in home participation among critically ill children.

AIM: To estimate changes in home participation among critically ill children in the first 6 months after discharge from a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), and to explore the effect of child, service, and environmental factors on change in home participation. METHOD: This was a prospective bi-center, longitudinal cohort study. Caregivers of 180 children, aged 1 to 17 years, who were admitted into the PICU for at least 48 hours were included. Patient-reported outcomes were used to capture caregivers' perspectives of their child's participation and environmental supports for participation in home activities. Data were collected at enrollment, and 3 and 6 months after discharge. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in home participation frequency or involvement, but involvement rates across time were moderated by functional status. Age significantly predicted participation frequency. Pre-PICU functional status and capabilities were significant predictors of participation frequency and involvement, and home environmental support significantly predicted home involvement. INTERPRETATION: Results suggest relatively stable participation trajectories in the 6 months after PICU admission. Children with abnormal baseline function experienced a greater increase in home involvement after PICU. Rehabilitation interventions targeting functional capabilities and home environment may be viable approaches during the early phase of recovery. Environmental interventions may be more time-efficient after PICU stay and merit further study. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Children's pre-pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) functional status and capabilities impact their participation after critical illness. Children's trajectories of home involvement may differ over time based on their pre-PICU functional status. Caregiver perceptions of environmental support impact a child's home involvement after discharge from a PICU.

Introduction of microsystems in a level 3 neonatal intensive care unit-an interprofessional approach.

BACKGROUND: Growth of neonatal intensive care units in number and size has raised questions towards ability to maintain continuity and quality of care. Structural organization of intensive care units is known as a key element for maintaining the quality of care of these fragile patients. The reconstruction of megaunits of intensive care to smaller care units within a single operational service might help with provision of safe and effective care. METHODS/DESIGN: The clinical team and patient distribution lay out, admission and discharge criteria and interdisciplinary round model was reorganized to follow the microstructure philosophy. A working group met weekly to formulate the implementation planning, to review the adaptation and adjustment process and to ascertain the quality of implementation following the initiation of the microsystem model. DISCUSSION: In depth examination of microsystem model of care in this study, provides systematic evaluation of this model on variable aspects of health care. The individual projects of this trial can be source of solid evidence for guidance of future decisions on optimized model of care for the critically ill newborns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT02912780 . Retrospectively registered on 22 September 2016.

Functional recovery following critical illness in children: the "wee-cover" pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of conducting a longitudinal prospective study to evaluate functional recovery and predictors of impaired functional recovery in critically ill children. DESIGN: Prospective pilot study. SETTING: Single-center PICU at McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, Canada. PATIENTS: Children aged 12 months to 17 years, with at least one organ dysfunction, limited mobility or bed rest during the first 48 hours of PICU admission, and a minimum 48-hour PICU length of stay, were eligible. Patients transferred from a neonatal ICU prior to ever being discharged home, already mobilizing well or at baseline functional status at time of screening, with an English language barrier, and prior enrollment into this study, were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was feasibility, as defined by the ability to screen, enroll eligible patients, and execute the study procedures and measurements on participants. Secondary outcomes included functional status at baseline, 3 and 6 months, PICU morbidity, and mortality. Functional status was measured using the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory and the Participation and Environment Measure for Children and Youth. Thirty-three patients were enrolled between October 2012 and April 2013. Consent rate was 85%, and follow-up rates were 93% at 3 months and 71% at 6 months. We were able to execute the study procedures and measurements, demonstrating feasibility of conducting a future longitudinal study. Functional status deteriorated following critical illness. Recovery appears to be influenced by baseline health or functional status and severity of illness. CONCLUSION: Longitudinal research is needed to understand how children recover after a critical illness. Our results suggest factors that may influence the recovery trajectory and were used to inform the methodology, outcomes of interest, and appropriate sample size of a larger multicenter study evaluating functional recovery in this population.

Self-disinfecting sink drains reduce the Pseudomonas aeruginosa bioburden in a neonatal intensive care unit.

AIM: Water in sink drains is a known source of gram-negative bacteria. We aimed to evaluate the impact of self-disinfecting sink drains on the emission of aerosolised bacteria and on Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition among neonates. METHODS: Aerosol bacterial growth and patient Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition rates were measured at baseline (Phase One), for 13 months after sinks were relocated or redesigned during refurbishment (Phase Two) and for 13 months after introducing self-disinfecting sink drains (Phase Three). RESULTS: Cultures were positive for bacterial growth in 56%, 24% and 13% of the tested aerosols in Phases One, Two and Three, respectively. Comparing Phases Two and Three produced an odds ratio (OR) of 0.47, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.22-0.99 (p = 0.047), for all bacteria and an OR of 0.31 and CI of 0.12-0.79 (p = 0.013) for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Rates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa positive clinical cultures were 0.34, 0.27 and 0.13 per 1000 patient days during the respective phases, with a significant increase of time to the next positive clinical culture in Phase Three. CONCLUSION: Self-disinfecting sink drains were superior to sink replacements in preventing emissions from aerosols pathogens and may reduce hospital-acquired infections. The bioburden reduction should be confirmed in a larger multicentre trial.

The impact of heterotopic ossification prophylaxis after surgical fixation of acetabular fractures: national treatment patterns and related outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a common complication after surgical fixation of acetabular fractures. Numerous strategies have been employed to prevent HO formation, but results are mixed and optimal treatment strategy remains controversial. The purpose of the study was to describe current national heterotopic ossification (HO) prophylaxis patterns among academic trauma centers, determine the association between prophylaxis type and radiographic HO, and identify if heterogeneity in treatment effects exist based on outcome risk strata. METHODS: We used data from a subset of participants enrolled in the Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Alcohol Skin Solutions in Fractured Extremities (PREPARE) trial. We included only patients with closed AO-type 62 acetabular fractures that were surgically treated via a posterior (Kocher-Langenbeck), combined anterior and posterior, or extensile exposure. PREPARE Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03523962 Patient population This cohort study was nested within the Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Alcohol Skin Solutions in Fractured Extremities (PREPARE) trial. The PREPARE trial is a multicenter cluster-randomized crossover trial evaluating the effectiveness of two alcohol-based pre-operative antiseptic skin solutions. All PREPARE trial clinical centers that enrolled at least one patient with a closed AO-type 62 acetabular fracture were invited to participate in the nested study. RESULTS: 277 patients from 20 level 1 and level 2 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada were included in this study. 32 patients (12%) received indomethacin prophylaxis, 100 patients (36%) received XRT prophylaxis, and 145 patients (52%) received no prophylaxis. Administration of XRT was associated with a 68% reduction in the adjusted odds of overall HO (OR 0.32, 95% CI, 0.14 - 0.69, p = 0.005). The overall severe HO (Brooker classes III or IV) rate was 8% for the entire cohort; XRT reduced the rate of severe HO in high-risk patients only (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: HO prophylaxis patterns after surgical fixation of acetabular fractures have changed dramatically over the last two decades. Most centers included in this study did not administer HO prophylaxis. XRT was associated with a marked reduction in the rate of overall HO and the rate of severe HO in high-risk patients. Randomized trials are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefit of XRT. PREPARE Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03523962.

Pragmatic design and inclusion of patient-partner representatives improves participant experience in clinical research.

Objectives: Patient engagement in the design and implementation of clinical trials is necessary to ensure that the research is relevant and responsive to patients. The PREP-IT trials, which include 2 pragmatic trials that evaluate different surgical preparation solutions in orthopaedic trauma patients, followed the patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) methodology throughout the design, implementation, and conduct. We conducted a substudy within the PREP-IT trials to explore participants' experiences with trial participation. Methods: At the final follow-up visit (12 months after their fracture), patients participating in the PREP-IT trials were invited to participate in the substudy. After providing informed consent, participants completed a questionnaire that asked about their experience and satisfaction with participating in the PREP-IT trials. Descriptive statistics are used to report the findings. Results: Four hundred two participants participated in the substudy. Most participants (394 [98%]) reported a positive experience, and 376 (94%) participants felt their contributions were appreciated. The primary reasons for participation were helping future patients with fracture (279 [69%]) and to contribute to science (223 [56%]). Two hundred seventeen (46%) participants indicated that their decision to participate was influenced by the minimal time commitment. Conclusions: Most participants reported a positive experience with participating in the PREP-IT trials. Altruism was the largest motivator for participating in this research. Approximately half of the participants indicated that the pragmatic, low-participant burden design of the trial influenced their decision to participate. Meaningful patient engagement, a pragmatic, and low-burden protocol led to high levels of participant satisfaction.

The impact of COVID-19 restrictions on participant enrollment in the PREPARE trial.

Background: At the initiation of the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions forced researchers to decide whether to continue their ongoing clinical trials. The PREPARE (Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Alcohol Skin Solutions in Fractured Extremities) trial is a pragmatic cluster-randomized crossover trial in patients with open and closed fractures. PREPARE was enrolling over 200 participants per month at the initiation of the pandemic. We aim to describe how the COVID-19 research restrictions affected participant enrollment. Methods: The PREPARE protocol permitted telephone consent, however, sites were obtaining consent in-person. To continue enrollment after the initiation of the restrictions participating sites obtained ethics approval for telephone consent scripts and the waiver of a signature on the consent form. We recorded the number of sites that switched to telephone consent, paused enrollment, and the length of the pause. We used t-tests to compare the differences in monthly enrollment between July 2019 and November 2020. Results: All 19 sites quickly implement telephone consent. Fourteen out of nineteen (73.6%) sites paused enrollment due to COVID-19 restrictions. The median length of enrollment pause was 46.5 days (range, 7-121 days; interquartile range, 61 days). The months immediately following the implementation of restrictions had significantly lower enrollment. Conclusion: A pragmatic design allowed sites to quickly adapt their procedures for obtaining informed consent via telephone and allowed for minimal interruptions to enrollment during the pandemic.

Managing work flow in high enrolling trials: The development and implementation of a sampling strategy in the PREPARE trial.

INTRODUCTION: Pragmatic trials in comparative effectiveness research assess the effects of different treatment, therapeutic, or healthcare options in clinical practice. They are characterized by broad eligibility criteria and large sample sizes, which can lead to an unmanageable number of participants, increasing the risk of bias and affecting the integrity of the trial. We describe the development of a sampling strategy tool and its use in the PREPARE trial to circumvent the challenge of unmanageable work flow. METHODS: Given the broad eligibility criteria and high fracture volume at participating clinical sites in the PREPARE trial, a pragmatic sampling strategy was needed. Using data from PREPARE, descriptive statistics were used to describe the use of the sampling strategy across clinical sites. A Chi-square test was performed to explore whether use of the sampling strategy was associated with a reduction in the number of missed eligible patients. RESULTS: 7 of 20 clinical sites (35%) elected to adopt a sampling strategy. There were 1539 patients excluded due to the use of the sampling strategy, which represents 30% of all excluded patients and 20% of all patients screened for participation. Use of the sampling strategy was associated with lower odds of missed eligible patients (297/4545 (6.5%) versus 341/3200 (10.7%) p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a sampling strategy in the PREPARE trial has helped to limit the number of missed eligible patients. This sampling strategy represents a simple, easy to use tool for managing work flow at clinical sites and maintaining the integrity of a large trial.

Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials.

INTRODUCTION: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent. METHODS: The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have. RESULTS: Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation. DISCUSSION: Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal.

Correction to: Cluster identification, selection, and description in Cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Cluster identification, selection, and description in cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials.

BACKGROUND: In cluster randomized crossover (CRXO) trials, groups of participants (i.e., clusters) are randomly allocated to receive a sequence of interventions over time (i.e., cluster periods). CRXO trials are becoming more comment when they are feasible, as they require fewer clusters than parallel group cluster randomized trials. However, CRXO trials have not been frequently used in orthopedic fracture trials and represent a novel methodological application within the field. To disseminate the early knowledge gained from our experience initiating two cluster randomized crossover trials, we describe our process for the identification and selection of the orthopedic practices (i.e., clusters) participating in the PREP-IT program and present data to describe their key characteristics. METHODS: The PREP-IT program comprises two ongoing pragmatic cluster randomized crossover trials (Aqueous-PREP and PREPARE) which compare the effect of iodophor versus chlorhexidine solutions on surgical site infection and unplanned fracture-related reoperations in patients undergoing operative fracture management. We describe the process we used to identify and select orthopedic practices (clusters) for the PREP-IT trials, along with their characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 58 potential orthopedic practices for inclusion in the PREP-IT trials. After screening each practice for eligibility, we selected 30 practices for participation and randomized each to a sequence of interventions (15 for Aqueous-PREP and 20 for PREPARE). The majority of orthopedic practices included in the Aqueous-PREP and PREPARE trials were situated in level I trauma centers (100% and 87%, respectively). Orthopedic practices in the Aqueous-PREP trial operatively treated a median of 149 open fracture patients per year, included a median of 11 orthopedic surgeons, and had access to a median of 5 infection preventionists. Orthopedic practices in the PREPARE trial treated a median of 142 open fracture and 1090 closed fracture patients per year, included a median of 7.5 orthopedic surgeons, and had access to a median of 6 infection preventionists. CONCLUSIONS: The PREP-IT trials provide an example of how to follow the reporting standards for cluster randomized crossover trials by providing a clear definition of the cluster unit, a thorough description of the cluster identification and selection process, and sufficient description of key cluster characteristics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Both trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (A-PREP: NCT03385304 December 28, 2017, and PREPARE: NCT03523962 May 14, 2018).

Effectiveness of Iodophor vs Chlorhexidine Solutions for Surgical Site Infections and Unplanned Reoperations for Patients Who Underwent Fracture Repair: The PREP-IT Master Protocol.

Importance: The risk of developing a surgical site infection after extremity fracture repair is nearly 5 times greater than in most elective orthopedic surgical procedures. For all surgical procedures, it is standard practice to prepare the operative site with an antiseptic solution; however, there is limited evidence to guide the choice of solution used for orthopedic fracture repair. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of iodophor vs chlorhexidine solutions to reduce surgical site infections and unplanned fracture-related reoperations for patients who underwent fracture repair. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PREP-IT (Program of Randomized Trials to Evaluate Pre-operative Antiseptic Skin Solutions in Orthopaedic Trauma) master protocol will be followed to conduct 2 multicenter pragmatic cluster randomized crossover trials, Aqueous-PREP (Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Aqueous Antiseptic Skin Solution in Open Fractures) and PREPARE (Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Alcohol Skin Solutions in Fractured Extremities). The Aqueous-PREP trial will compare 4% aqueous chlorhexidine vs 10% povidone-iodine for patients with open extremity fractures. The PREPARE trial will compare 2% chlorhexidine in 70% isopropyl alcohol vs 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol for patients with open extremity fractures and patients with closed lower extremity or pelvic fractures. Both trials will share key aspects of study design and trial infrastructure. The studies will follow a pragmatic cluster randomized crossover design with alternating treatment periods of approximately 2 months. The primary outcome will be surgical site infection and the secondary outcome will be unplanned fracture-related reoperations within 12 months. The Aqueous-PREP trial will enroll a minimum of 1540 patients with open extremity fractures from at least 12 hospitals; PREPARE will enroll a minimum of 1540 patients with open extremity fractures and 6280 patients with closed lower extremity and pelvic fractures from at least 18 hospitals. The primary analyses will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle and account for potential between-cluster and between-period variability. The patient-centered design, implementation, and dissemination of results are guided by a multidisciplinary team that includes 3 patients and other relevant stakeholders. Discussion: The PREP-IT master protocol increases efficiency through shared trial infrastructure and study design components. Because prophylactic skin antisepsis is used prior to all surgical procedures and the application, cost, and availability of all study solutions are similar, the results of the PREP-IT trials are poised to inform clinical guidelines and bring about an immediate change in clinical practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03385304 and NCT03523962.