Abstract

Background Assessing fidelity to complex healthcare interventions in clinical trials is a challenging area. ‘ICONS’ is a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial of a systematic voiding programme (SVP), incorporating bladder training and prompted voiding, to promote post-stroke continence. Here we describe feasibility of one aspect of fidelity assessment: the day-to-day implementation of the SVP through analysis of clinical logs. Methods Nurses completed clinical logs daily, which included documenting: the toileting interval, proposed toileting times and times toileted. Clinical logs were sampled across trial sites. The original intention was to assess fidelity by exploring the degree of concordance between proposed times and times toileted. Initial analysis revealed the unfeasibility of this method due to documentation errors in toileting intervals and proposed times. Consequently, the planned method was changed to identification of key ‘quality indicators’ (QIs) for documentation of practice. Results The need to revise the method of measurement demonstrates the difficulty in assessing fidelity. Assessment of clinical logs revealed low levels of adherence to key quality indicators. However, it is unclear whether this indicates poor fidelity or an imprecise method of fidelity assessment. Conclusion

Highlights

  • Assessing fidelity to complex healthcare interventions in clinical trials is a challenging area

  • Clinical logs were sampled across trial sites

  • For ICONS, clinical logs constituted a proxy measure of day-to-day fidelity to the intervention: identification of alternative methods could be considered

Read more

Summary

Open Access

Brigit Chesworth1*, Michael Leathley, Lois Thomas, Denise Forshaw, Chris Sutton, Bev French, Chris Burton, David Britt, Brenda Roe, Francine Cheater, Caroline Watkins. From 2nd Clinical Trials Methodology Conference: Methodology Matters Edinburgh, UK. From 2nd Clinical Trials Methodology Conference: Methodology Matters Edinburgh, UK. 18-19 November 2013

Background
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.