Evaluation of a targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention designed to increase uptake of emergency management recommendations regarding adult patients with mild traumatic brain injury: results of the NET cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based guidelines for management of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in the emergency department (ED) are now widely available; however, clinical practice remains inconsistent with these guidelines. A targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention (Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) intervention) was designed to increase the uptake of three clinical practice recommendations regarding the management of patients who present to Australian EDs with mild head injuries. The intervention involved local stakeholder meetings, identification and training of nursing and medical local opinion leaders, train-the-trainer workshops and standardised education materials and interactive workshops delivered by the opinion leaders to others within their EDs during a 3 month period. This paper reports on the effects of this intervention. METHODS: EDs (clusters) were allocated to receive either access to a clinical practice guideline (control) or the implementation intervention, using minimisation, a method that allocates clusters to groups using an algorithm to minimise differences in predefined factors between the groups. We measured clinical practice outcomes at the patient level using chart audit. The primary outcome was appropriate screening for post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) using a validated tool until a perfect score was achieved (indicating absence of acute cognitive impairment) before the patient was discharged home. Secondary outcomes included appropriate CT scanning and the provision of written patient information upon discharge. Patient health outcomes (anxiety, primary outcome: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were also assessed using follow-up telephone interviews. Outcomes were assessed by independent auditors and interviewers, blinded to group allocation. RESULTS: Fourteen EDs were allocated to the intervention and 17 to the control condition; 1943 patients were included in the chart audit. At 2 months follow-up, patients attending intervention EDs (n = 893) compared with control EDs (n = 1050) were more likely to have been appropriately assessed for PTA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 20.1, 95%CI 6.8 to 59.3; adjusted absolute risk difference (ARD) 14%, 95%CI 8 to 19). The odds of compliance with recommendations for CT scanning and provision of written patient discharge information were small (OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8 to 1.6; ARD 3.2, 95%CI - 3.7 to 10 and OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8 to 1.8; ARD 3.1, 95%CI - 3.0 to 9.3 respectively). A total of 343 patients at ten interventions and 14 control sites participated in follow-up interviews at 4.3 to 10.7 months post-ED presentation. The intervention had a small effect on anxiety levels (adjusted mean difference - 0.52, 95%CI - 1.34 to 0.30; scale 0-21, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety). CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention was effective in improving the uptake of the PTA recommendation; however, it did not appreciably increase the uptake of the other two practice recommendations. Improved screening for PTA may be clinically important as it leads to appropriate periods of observation prior to safe discharge. The estimated intervention effect on anxiety was of limited clinical significance. We were not able to compare characteristics of EDs who declined trial participation with those of participating sites, which may limit the generalizability of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12612001286831), date registered 12 December 2012.

Developing a targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention using two theoretical frameworks to address health professional and organisational factors: a case study to improve the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department (ED), variations in practice exist. Interventions designed to implement recommended behaviours can reduce this variation. Using theory to inform intervention development is advocated; however, there is no consensus on how to select or apply theory. Integrative theoretical frameworks, based on syntheses of theories and theoretical constructs relevant to implementation, have the potential to assist in the intervention development process. This paper describes the process of applying two theoretical frameworks to investigate the factors influencing recommended behaviours and the choice of behaviour change techniques and modes of delivery for an implementation intervention. METHODS: A stepped approach was followed: (i) identification of locally applicable and actionable evidence-based recommendations as targets for change, (ii) selection and use of two theoretical frameworks for identifying barriers to and enablers of change (Theoretical Domains Framework and Model of Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organisations) and (iii) identification and operationalisation of intervention components (behaviour change techniques and modes of delivery) to address the barriers and enhance the enablers, informed by theory, evidence and feasibility/acceptability considerations. We illustrate this process in relation to one recommendation, prospective assessment of post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) by ED staff using a validated tool. RESULTS: Four recommendations for managing mild traumatic brain injury were targeted with the intervention. The intervention targeting the PTA recommendation consisted of 14 behaviour change techniques and addressed 6 theoretical domains and 5 organisational domains. The mode of delivery was informed by six Cochrane reviews. It was delivered via five intervention components : (i) local stakeholder meetings, (ii) identification of local opinion leader teams, (iii) a train-the-trainer workshop for appointed local opinion leaders, (iv) local training workshops for delivery by trained local opinion leaders and (v) provision of tools and materials to prompt recommended behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: Two theoretical frameworks were used in a complementary manner to inform intervention development in managing mild traumatic brain injury in the ED. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the developed intervention is being evaluated in a cluster randomised trial, part of the Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) program.

Identifying posttraumatic amnesia in individuals with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15 after mild traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of the Abbreviated Westmead Post-traumatic Amnesia Scale, which includes the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and 3 picture cards used to measure amnesia, in identifying the presence or absence of posttraumatic amnesia in individuals with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). DESIGN: Prospective study using data from the Abbreviated Westmead Post-traumatic Amnesia Scale. SETTING: Trauma hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with possible mTBI who presented between April and September 2011 (N=252; age range, 18-65y; mean age, 37.4±13.9y; 77% men). INTERVENTION: Administration of the Abbreviated Westmead Post-traumatic Amnesia Scale. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GCS and Abbreviated Westmead Post-traumatic Amnesia Scale pass/fail rates. RESULTS: Of the individuals, 169 (mean age, 35.1±13.6y; 77% men) received the scale. A pass/fail performance was achieved a median 121 minutes (interquartile range, 89-205min) after triage. Of the 45 who failed, 31 (69%) had a GCS score of 15. The likelihood of failing was associated with being older (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.06; P<.05), having consumed alcohol (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.42-6.74; P<.01), and the scale being administered closer to the time of the injury (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P<.05). Nineteen (42%) of those who failed had consumed alcohol, 11 had a GCS score of 15, and 8 had a GCS score of 14. CONCLUSIONS: A GCS score of 15 does not always signify return to normative cognitive function. Individuals with a GCS score of 15 who are acutely cognitively impaired are at risk of not being accurately identified. The addition of an amnesia score to the GCS in the Abbreviated Westmead Post-traumatic Amnesia Scale will assist in making a diagnosis of mTBI.