Evaluation of a toolkit to improve cardiovascular disease screening and treatment for people with type 2 diabetes: protocol for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial

Abstract

BackgroundThe gap between the level of care recommended by evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and the actual care delivered to patients in practice has been well established. The Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) created an implementation strategy to improve the implementation of its 2008 guidelines. This study will evaluate the impact of the strategy to improve cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening, prevention and treatment for people with diabetes.DesignA pragmatic cluster-randomized trial will be conducted to evaluate the CDA's CVD Toolkit. All family physicians in Ontario, Canada were randomly allocated to receive the Toolkit, which includes several printed educational materials targeting CVD screening, prevention and treatment, either in spring 2009 (intervention arm) or in spring 2010 (control arm). Randomization occurred at the level of the practice. Forty family physicians from each arm will be recruited to participate, and the medical records for 20 of their diabetic patients at high risk for CVD will be retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures will be assessed for each patient between July 2009 and March 2010. The primary outcome will be that the patient is receiving a statin. Secondary outcomes will include 1) the receipt of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, 2) various intermediate measures (A1c, blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, total-/HDL-cholesterol ratio, body mass index and waist circumference), and 3) clinical inertia (the failure to change therapy in response to an abnormal A1c, blood pressure or cholesterol reading). The analysis will be carried out using multilevel hierarchical logistic regression models to account for the clustered nature of the data. The group assignment will be a physician-level variable. In addition, a process evaluation study with six focus groups of family physicians will assess the acceptability of the CDA's Toolkit and will explore factors contributing to any change or lack of change in behaviour, from the perspectives of family physicians.DiscussionPrinted educational materials for physicians have been shown to exert small-to-moderate changes in patient care. The CDA's CVD Toolkit is an example of a practice guideline implementation strategy that can be disseminated to a wide audience relatively inexpensively, and so demonstrating its effectiveness at improving diabetes care could have important consequences for guideline developers, policy makers and clinicians.Trial RegistrationThe trial is registered with http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, ID # NCT01026688

Effect of an Educational Toolkit on Quality of Care: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial

“…To have 80% power to detect this difference with an α-error of 0.05, a sample size of 796 per group with 20 patients per practice was needed [16].…”

Development of a toolkit for early identification of cauda equina syndrome

“…Similarly, the development of this CES toolkit drew on experiences of CES patients and experienced clinicians working in this field. Toolkits have been shown to be a cost effective method of disseminating practical evidence based guidelines to a wide audience (Shah et al ., 2010). Eraut (2000) suggested that checklists such as the one developed on the clinician’s cue card can assist in developing ‘routinisation of clinical action’ which will lead to improved patient outcomes.…”

Success of the 4 Pillars Toolkit for Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination in Adults

“…Based on lessons learned from the previous evaluation, this toolkit broadened the approach to improving adult immunizations in primary care with an ordered and linked set of strategies that support SOPs and expand opportunities to increase adult vaccination rates. A number of toolkits for healthcare providers on a variety of clinical topics have been or are being developed (Dykes et al, ; MacDonald, Aavitsland, Bitar, & Borgen, ; Shah et al, ; Williams, Mears, Raisor, & Wilson, ), based on literature reviews of evidence‐based research and expert consultation, and are commonly pilot‐tested and revised before dissemination. In this evaluation of our revised SOP toolkit, we found areas for additional improvements.…”