4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Cluster Randomized Trials in Comparative Effectiveness Research Randomizing Hospitals to Test Methods for Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections

期刊

MEDICAL CARE
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 S52-S57

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181dbebcf

关键词

cluster randomization; comparative effectiveness; MRSA prevention

资金

  1. NCPDCID CDC HHS [U01CI000344] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The need for evidence about the effectiveness of therapeutics and other medical practices has triggered new interest in methods for comparative effectiveness research. Objective: Describe an approach to comparative effectiveness research involving cluster randomized trials in networks of hospitals, health plans, or medical practices with centralized administrative and informatics capabilities. Research Design: We discuss the example of an ongoing cluster randomized trial to prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in intensive care units (ICUs). The trial randomizes 45 hospitals to: ( a) screening cultures of ICU admissions, followed by Contact Precautions if MRSA-positive, (b) screening cultures of ICU admissions followed by decolonization if MRSA- positive, or ( c) universal decolonization of ICU admissions without screening. Subjects: All admissions to adult ICUs. Measures: The primary outcome is MRSA- positive clinical cultures occurring >= 2 days following ICU admission. Secondary outcomes include blood and urine infection caused by MRSA ( and, separately, all pathogens), as well as the development of resistance to decolonizing agents. Results: Recruitment of hospitals is complete. Data collection will end in Summer 2011. Conclusions: This trial takes advantage of existing personnel, procedures, infrastructure, and information systems in a large integrated hospital network to conduct a low-cost evaluation of prevention strategies under usual practice conditions. This approach is applicable to many comparative effectiveness topics in both inpatient and ambulatory settings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据