An interventional study of mailing of printed educational materials and a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders in Croup, sponsored by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Terminated. Open to participants aged 0 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2005-11-29.
Sponsored by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) · Not applicable, Interventional, and Educational/counseling/training
The purpose of this study is to identify, from a societal perspective, the costs and associated benefits of three strategies for disseminating and implementing a practice guideline that addresses the management of croup.
Overall Aim: The overall aim of this study is to identify - from a societal perspective - the costs and associated benefits of three strategies for implementing a practice guideline that addresses the management of croup.
Intervention Strategies: The intervention strategies to be compared will be mailing of printed educational materials (the "Standard intervention"), mailing plus a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders (a "Saturn intervention"), and a combination of mailing, interactive sessions, outreach visits, reminders plus identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes (a "Cadillac intervention").
Primary Objective: To determine which of the three intervention strategies are most effective at lowering the rate of hospital days per 1,000 disease episodes. The null hypothesis is that none of the intervention strategies reduce hospital utilization rates from baseline. The alternate hypothesis is that the intervention strategies will have a graded degree of effect on hospitalization rates, with the 'Standard intervention' having minimal to no effect, the 'Saturn intervention' having moderate but significant effect, and the 'Cadillac intervention' having the greatest effect.
Secondary Objective: To determine which of the three dissemination strategies are most effective at increasing the use of therapies of known benefit.
Economic Analysis: To determine which of the three intervention strategies will most effectively reduce total societal costs including all health care costs, costs borne by the family, and costs stemming from the strategies for disseminating guidelines.
Other Objectives: To determine which dissemination strategy will most effectively maintain or improve clinical outcomes and maintain or reduce the family psychosocial burden. Clinical outcomes assessed will include both uncommon severe events such as endotracheal intubation, respiratory arrest, and death, as well as average duration of clinical symptoms. The assessment of family psychosocial burden will include the number of hours of sleep missed by the child, and the stress experienced by the primary caregiver (most commonly the mother).
Study Plan: The study objectives will be achieved through the following:
18 studies on the registry are indexed under Croup; 2 are open to participants now.
Browse Croup studies →Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) is the lead sponsor of 6 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Rate of hospital days per 1,000 disease episodes
Proportion of patients treated in the ED and hospital with a corticosteroid.
Proportion of patients evaluated in ED for at least three hours after treatment with corticosteroids before the decision to admit to hospital is made.
Time to treatment with corticosteroids in both ED and hospital patients.
An economic analysis conducted from a societal perspective with costs classified as either payer (costs born by the province) or non-payer (costs born by individuals or the families of children with croup).
No study locations are listed for this record.
This study is terminated, as verified in Sep 2005. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)