RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Feasibility of a Cluster Randomised Trial on the Effect of Trauma Life Support Training: A Pilot Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.03.13.24304236
DO 10.1101/2024.03.13.24304236
A1 Trauma life support training Effectiveness Research Network (TERN) collaborators
A1 Gerdin Wärnberg, Martin
A1 Basak, Debojit
A1 Berg, Johanna
A1 Chatterjee, Shamita
A1 Felländer-Tsai, Li
A1 Ghag, Geeta
A1 Khajanchi, Monty
A1 Khan, Tamal
A1 Juillard, Catherine
A1 Nandu, Vipul
A1 Roy, Nobhojit
A1 Singh, Rajdeep
A1 Dev Soni, Kapil
A1 Strömmer, Lovisa
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/11/26/2024.03.13.24304236.abstract
AB Importance There is no high-quality evidence to show that trauma life support training programmes improve patient outcomes.Objective To assess the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effect of Advanced Trauma Life Support® (ATLS®) and Primary Trauma Care (PTC) with standard care on patient outcomes, and to estimate probable effect sizes and other measures needed for the sample size calculations of a full-scale trial.Design A pilot pragmatic three-armed parallel, cluster randomised, controlled trial between April 2022 and February 2023. Patient follow up was 30 days.Setting Tertiary care hospitals across metropolitan areas in India.Participants Adult trauma patients and residents managing these patients.Interventions ATLS® or PTC training for residents in the intervention arms.Main Outcomes and Measures The outcomes were consent rate, lost to follow up rate, pass rate, missing data rates, differences in distribution between observed and data extracted from medical records as well as all cause and in-hospital mortality at 30 days from the time of arrival to the emergency department.Results Two hospitals were randomised to ATLS®, two to PTC, and three to standard care. We included 376 patients and 22 residents. The percentage of patients who consented to follow up was 77% and the percentage of residents who consented to training was 100%. The lost to follow up rate was 14%. The pass rate was 100%. The missing data was overall low for key variables. Data collected through observations were similar to data extracted from medical records, but there was more missing data in the extracted data. Twenty-two (16%) patients died within 30 days in the standard care arm, one (4%) patient in the ATLS® arm, and three (5%) patients in the PTC arm.Conclusions and Relevance Conducting a full-scale cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effects of ATLS®, PTC, and standard care on patient outcomes will be feasible, especially if such a trial would use data and outcomes available in medical records.Question Is it feasible to conduct a cluster randomised trial comparing trauma life support training with standard care?Findings In this pilot cluster randomized trial that included 376 patients and 22 residents from seven hospitals, we found high consent rates, low lost to follow up rates, and low missing data for key variables.Meaning Conducting a full-scale cluster cluster trial comparing the effects of trauma life support training with standard care on patient outcomes will be feasible, especially if such a trial would use data and outcomes available in medical records.Competing Interest StatementSeveral members of the Trauma life support training Effectiveness Research Network are ATLS and/or PTC instructors.Clinical TrialNCT05417243Clinical Protocols https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057504 Funding StatementDoctors for You through grants awarded to Karolinska Institutet by the Swedish Research Council (grant number 2020-03779) and the Laerdal Foundation (grant number 2021-0048).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:We were granted research ethics approval from the institutional ethics committees at each participating hospital. For each participating hospital, the approvals were HBTMC/266/SURGERY for Dr R N Cooper Municipal General Hospital in Mumbai, IEC(II)/OUT/134/2022 for Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital in Mumbai, ICC/214/22/20/05/2022 for Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, CREC/2022/FEB/1(ii) for MEDICA Superspeciality Hospital in Kolkata, MC/KOL/IEC/NON-SPON/1217/11/21 for Medical College, Kolkata, NRSMC/IEC/93/2021 for Nilratan Sircar Medical College & Hospital in Kolkata, and finally IEC-03/2022-2332 for the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.