Keep It Up! 3.0: Study protocol for a type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that eHealth approaches can be effective in reducing HIV risk, their implementation requirements for public health scale up are not well established, and effective strategies to bring these programs into practice are still unknown. Keep It Up! (KIU!) is an online program proven to reduce HIV risk among young men who have sex with men (YMSM) and ideal candidate to develop and evaluate novel strategies for implementing eHealth HIV prevention programs. KIU! 3.0 is a Type III Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation cluster randomized trial designed to 1) compare two strategies for implementing KIU!: community-based organizations (CBO) versus centralized direct-to-consumer (DTC) recruitment; 2) examine the effect of strategies and determinants on variability in implementation success; and 3) develop materials for sustainment of KIU! after the trial concludes. In this article, we describe the approaches used to achieve these aims. METHODS: Using county-level population estimates of YMSM, 66 counties were selected and randomized 2:1 to the CBO and DTC approaches. The RE-AIM model was used to drive outcome measurements, which were collected from CBO staff, YMSM, and technology providers. Mixed-methods research mapped onto the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will examine determinants and their relationship with implementation outcomes. DISCUSSION: In comparing our implementation recruitment models, we are examining two strategies which have shown effectiveness in delivering health technology interventions in the past, yet little is known about their comparative advantages and disadvantages in implementation. The results of the trial will further the understanding of eHealth prevention intervention implementation.

Effectiveness and implementation of an online intervention (MINDxYOU) for reducing stress and promote mental health among healthcare workers in Spain: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has formally recognized that healthcare professionals are at risk of developing mental health problems; finding ways to reduce their stress is mandatory to improve both their quality of life and, indirectly, their job performance. In recent years, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, there has been a proliferation of online interventions with promising results. The purpose of the present study is twofold: to test the effectiveness of an online, self-guided intervention, MINDxYOU, to reduce the stress levels of healthcare workers; and to conduct an implementation study of this intervention. Additionally, an economic evaluation of the intervention will be conducted. METHODS: The current study has a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type 2 design. A stepped wedge cluster randomized trial design will be used, with a cohort of 180 healthcare workers recruited in two Spanish provinces (Malaga and Zaragoza). The recruitment stage will commence in October 2022. Frontline health workers who provide direct care to people in a hospital, primary care center, or nursing home setting in both regions will participate. The effectiveness of the intervention will be studied, with perceived stress as the main outcome (Perceived Stress Scale), while other psychopathological symptoms and process variables (e.g., mindfulness, compassion, resilience, and psychological flexibility) will be also assessed as secondary outcomes. The implementation study will include analysis of feasibility, acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. The incremental costs and benefits, in terms of quality-adjusted life years, will be examined by means of cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses. DISCUSSION: MINDxYOU is designed to reduce healthcare workers' stress levels through the practice of mindfulness, acceptance, and compassion, with a special focus on how to apply these skills to healthy habits and considering the particular stressors that these professionals face on a daily basis. The present study will show how implementation studies are useful for establishing the framework in which to address barriers to and promote facilitators for acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability of online interventions. The ultimate goal is to reduce the research-to-practice gap. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 29/06/2022; registration number: NCT05436717.

Development, validation and evaluation of learning activities to support the reporting of adverse drug reactions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The fast tracking of the production of COVID-19 vaccines gave rise to aspects of general concern regarding their safety. The vigilance aspect of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting is a means to build up the science behind the safety aspects. The aim was to develop, validate and apply learning activities for healthcare professionals (HCPs) to educate and support them on ADR reporting. Methods: Two educational webinars were developed, validated, applied and evaluated by pharmacists, medical doctors, dentists and nurses. Results: Evaluation forms about the webinars were completed by 103 out of 132 HCPs (first webinar), and 73 out of 90 HCPs (second webinar). Conclusion: HCPs agreed that the educational webinars made them more aware of the importance of ADR reporting and the webinars helped them overcome barriers to ADR reporting.

The Evaluation of a Social Media Campaign to Increase COVID-19 Testing in Migrant Groups: Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: A low test positivity rate is key to keeping the COVID-19 pandemic under control. Throughout the pandemic, several migrant groups in Norway have seen higher rates of confirmed COVID-19 and related hospitalizations, while test positivity has remained high in the same groups. The Norwegian government has used several platforms for communication, and targeted social media advertisements have in particular been an important part of the communication strategy to reach these groups. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to investigate whether such a targeted Facebook campaign increased the rate of COVID-19 tests performed in certain migrant groups. METHODS: We randomly assigned 386 Norwegian municipalities and city districts to intervention or control groups. Individuals born in Eritrea, Iraq, Pakistan, Poland, Russia, Somalia, Syria, and Turkey residing in intervention areas were targeted with a social media campaign aiming at increasing the COVID-19 test rate. The campaign message was in a simple language and conveyed in the users' main language or in English. RESULTS: During the 2-week follow-up period, the predicted probability of having a COVID-19 test taken was 4.82% (95% CI 4.47%-5.18%) in the control group, and 5.58% (95% CI 5.20%-5.99%) in the intervention group (P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: Our targeted social media intervention led to a modest increase in test rates among certain migrant groups in Norway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04866589; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04866589.

Community-based differentiated service delivery models incorporating multi-month dispensing of antiretroviral treatment for newly stable people living with HIV receiving single annual clinical visits: a pooled analysis of two cluster-randomized trials in southern Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Differentiated service delivery (DSD) models for HIV treatment decrease health facility visit frequency and limit healthcare facility-based exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. However, two important evidence gaps include understanding DSD effectiveness amongst clients commencing DSD within 12 months of antiretroviral treatment (ART) initiation and amongst clients receiving only single annual clinical consultations. To investigate these, we pooled data from two cluster-randomized trials investigating community-based DSD in Zimbabwe and Lesotho. METHODS: Individual-level participant data of newly stable adults enrolled between 6 and 12 months after ART initiation were pooled. Both trials (conducted between August 2017 and July 2019) had three arms: Standard-of-care three-monthly ART provision at healthcare facilities (SoC, control); ART provided three-monthly in community ART groups (CAGs) (3MC) and ART provided six-monthly in either CAGs or at community-distribution points (6MC). Clinical visits were three-monthly in SoC and annually in intervention arms. The primary outcome was retention in care and secondary outcomes were viral suppression (VS) and number of unscheduled facility visits 12 months after enrolment. Individual-level regression analyses were conducted by intention-to-treat specifying for clustering and adjusted for country. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 599 participants were included; 212 (35.4%), 128 (21.4%) and 259 (43.2%) in SoC, 3MC and 6MC, respectively. Few participants aged <25 years were included (n = 32). After 12 months, 198 (93.4%), 123 (96.1%) and 248 (95.8%) were retained in SoC, 3MC and 6MC, respectively. Retention in 3MC was superior versus SoC, adjusted risk difference (aRD) = 4.6% (95% CI: 0.7%-8.5%). Retention in 6MC was non-inferior versus SoC, aRD = 1.7% (95% CI: -2.5%-5.9%) (prespecified non-inferiority aRD margin -3.25%). VS was similar between arms, 99.3, 98.6 and 98.1% in SoC, 3MC and 6MC, respectively. Adjusted risk ratio's for VS were 0.98 (95% CI: 0.92-1.03) for 3MC versus SoC, and 0.98 (CI: 0.95-1.00) for 6MC versus SoC. Unscheduled clinic visits were not increased in intervention arms: incidence rate ratio = 0.53 (CI: 0.16-1.80) for 3MC versus SoC; and 0.82 (CI: 0.25-2.79) for 6MC versus SoC. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based DSD incorporating three- and six-monthly ART refills and single annual clinical visits were at least non-inferior to standard facility-based care amongst newly stable ART clients aged ≥25 years. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03238846 & NCT03438370.

Reopening schools safely in the face of COVID-19: Can cluster randomized trials help?

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the challenges of evidence-based health policymaking, as critical precautionary decisions, such as school closures, had to be made urgently on the basis of little evidence. As primary and secondary schools once again close in the face of surging infections, there is an opportunity to rigorously study their reopening. School-aged children appear to be less affected by COVID-19 than adults, yet schools may drive community transmission of the virus. Given the impact of school closures on both education and the economy, schools cannot remain closed indefinitely. But when and how can they be reopened safely? We argue that a cluster randomized trial is a rigorous and ethical way to resolve these uncertainties. We discuss key scientific, ethical, and resource considerations both to inform trial design of school reopenings and to prompt discussion of the merits and feasibility of conducting such a trial.