4.4 Article

Cluster randomized trials utilizing primary care electronic health records: methodological issues in design, conduct, and analysis (eCRT Study)

Journal

TRIALS
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-220

Keywords

Clinical trial; Cluster randomization; Electronic health records; Primary care; Implementation science; Decision support

Funding

  1. Joint Initiative in Electronic Patient Records and Databases in Research
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's
  3. MHRA
  4. Wellcome Trust
  5. Medical Research Council
  6. NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
  7. Innovative Medicine Initiative
  8. UK Department of Health
  9. Technology Strategy Board
  10. Seventh Framework Programme EU
  11. St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  12. King's College London
  13. Medical Research Council [MR/K006665/1, MC_PC_13042] Funding Source: researchfish
  14. MRC [MR/K006665/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: There is growing interest in conducting clinical and cluster randomized trials through electronic health records. This paper reports on the methodological issues identified during the implementation of two cluster randomized trials using the electronic health records of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Methods: Two trials were completed in primary care: one aimed to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infection; the other aimed to increase physician adherence with secondary prevention interventions after first stroke. The paper draws on documentary records and trial datasets to report on the methodological experience with respect to research ethics and research governance approval, general practice recruitment and allocation, sample size calculation and power, intervention implementation, and trial analysis. Results: We obtained research governance approvals from more than 150 primary care organizations in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were 104 CPRD general practices recruited to the antibiotic trial and 106 to the stroke trial, with the target number of practices being recruited within six months. Interventions were installed into practice information systems remotely over the internet. The mean number of participants per practice was 5,588 in the antibiotic trial and 110 in the stroke trial, with the coefficient of variation of practice sizes being 0.53 and 0.56 respectively. Outcome measures showed substantial correlations between the 12 months before, and after intervention, with coefficients ranging from 0.42 for diastolic blood pressure to 0.91 for proportion of consultations with antibiotics prescribed, defining practice and participant eligibility for analysis requires careful consideration. Conclusions: Cluster randomized trials may be performed efficiently in large samples from UK general practices using the electronic health records of a primary care database. The geographical dispersal of trial sites presents a difficulty for research governance approval and intervention implementation. Pretrial data analyses should inform trial design and analysis plans.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available