Effects of Performance Feedback on Imaging Use in the Emergency Department

NCT ID: NCT02283086

Last Updated: 2014-11-05

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

43 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-01-31

Study Completion Date

2013-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

DESIGN: An IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant prospective randomized controlled trial conducted from January 1, 2012-December 31, 2013.

SETTING: The ED of an urban Level-I adult trauma center with existing CDS for CTPE.

PARTICIPANTS: All attending physicians were stratified into quartiles by 2012 CTPE use and randomized to receive feedback reporting or not.

INTERVENTION: Quarterly performance feedback reports consisting of individual and anonymized group data on EBG adherence (using the Wells criteria), CTPE use (CTPEs per 1,000 patients), and yield (percentage of CTPEs positive for PE) beginning January 2013.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Setting and Subjects This IRB-approved and HIPAA-compliant prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2013 in the ED of an urban Level-I adult trauma center. Imaging CDS was deployed for all CTPE requests throughout the study period as previously reported. Ordering providers could ignore the evidence presented in CDS and proceed with CTPE requests deviating from evidence-based guidelines without interference. The investigators included all attending emergency physicians and, prior to randomization, stratified them into quartiles by 2012 CTPE use. Physicians were randomized by quartile into two groups using a random number generator: the intervention group received individualized feedback reports on CTPE adherence to EBG, use (defined as number of CTPEs per 1,000 patients), and yield (percentage of CTPEs positive for PE), and the control group did not.

Data Collection Use of CTPEs for each physician was calculated using the number of completed CTPE examinations and the total number of patients seen during the quarter. Yield of CTPEs for acute PE was determined using a previously validated natural language processing tool and reported as a percentage of total CTPEs completed. Adherence to EBG was determined by applying the Wells Criteria and reviewing the serum D-dimer levels (if obtained). The discrete criteria making up the Wells Criteria were prospectively documented in the investigators computerized order entry (CPOE) system at the time of order entry, as previously reported.

In order to determine whether any differences observed in guideline adherence were the result of "gaming" (erroneous data entry to either avoid potentially onerous CDS interactions or to enhancing the physician's apparent performance on feedback reports) the investigators performed manual chart reviews of 100 randomly chosen charts from each of the two groups. These chart reviews were performed by an attending physician to assess concordance between adherence to EBG calculated from the CDS data, and adherence to EBG calculated from data documented in the ED visit clinical note. The sample size was determined using a baseline concordance of 90% as previously reported, and chosen to detect a difference in concordance of 15% between groups with a power of 80% and an alpha error rate of 5%. Demographic data (including gender and both age and years since residency training as measured at the beginning of the study period) was also captured for all the attending physicians in the study.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Pulmonary Embolism

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Control

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Intervention

The intervention consisted of quarterly performance feedback reports sent via e-mail.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Physician Feedback Reporting

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

The performance feedback reports displayed both individual physicians' statistics as well as their performance compared to anonymized results for the entire group of emergency physicians.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Physician Feedback Reporting

The performance feedback reports displayed both individual physicians' statistics as well as their performance compared to anonymized results for the entire group of emergency physicians.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* All attending physicians in the emergency department

Exclusion Criteria

* None
Minimum Eligible Age

15 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Brigham and Women's Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Ramin Khorasani, M.D.,M.P.H.

Vice Chairman, Department of Radiology

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Ramin Khorasani, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2009-P001587

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Communication During Hospitalization About Resuscitation Trial
NCT02984124 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING PHASE2/PHASE3
Precision Feedback to Improve Health Care Quality
NCT05923463 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA