Effect of a participatory intervention with women's groups on birth outcomes in Nepal: cluster-randomised controlled trial. Informing resource-poor populations and the delivery of entitled health and social services in rural India: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Fewer adverse events as a result of the SAFE or SORRY? programme in hospitals and nursing homes. part i: primary outcome of a cluster randomised trial. Family-member DOTS and community DOTS for tuberculosis control in Nepal: cluster-randomised controlled trial. Changing antibiotics prescribing practices in health centers of Khartoum State, Sudan. Cluster randomised trial of an active, multifaceted educational intervention based on the WHO Reproductive Health Library to improve obstetric practices. Effect of a participatory intervention with women's groups on birth outcomes and maternal depression in Jharkhand and Orissa, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Investigation of within-study selective reporting in clinical research: follow-up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committee. Analysis of the North Carolina long-term care polypharmacy initiative: a multiple-cohort approach using propensity-score matching for both evaluation and targeting.
Neonatal deaths in developing countries make the largest contribution to global mortality in children younger than 5 years. 90% of deliveries in the poorest quintile of households happen at home. We postulated that a community-based participatory intervention could significantly reduce neonatal mortality rates.
                We pair-matched 42 geopolitical clusters in Makwanpur district, Nepal, selected 12 pairs randomly, and randomly assigned one of each pair to intervention or control. In each intervention cluster (average population 7000), a female facilitator convened nine women's group meetings every month. The facilitator supported groups through an action-learning cycle in which they identified local perinatal problems and formulated strategies to address them. We monitored birth outcomes in a cohort of 28?931 women, of whom 8% joined the groups. The primary outcome was neonatal mortality rate. Other outcomes included stillbirths and maternal deaths, uptake of antenatal and delivery services, home care practices, infant morbidity, and health-care seeking. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN31137309.
                From 2001 to 2003, the neonatal mortality rate was 26.2 per 1000 (76 deaths per 2899 livebirths) in intervention clusters compared with 36.9 per 1000 (119 deaths per 3226 livebirths) in controls (adjusted odds ratio 0.70 [95% CI 0.53-0.94]). Stillbirth rates were similar in both groups. The maternal mortality ratio was 69 per 100000 (two deaths per 2899 livebirths) in intervention clusters compared with 341 per 100000 (11 deaths per 3226 livebirths) in control clusters (0.22 [0.05-0.90]). Women in intervention clusters were more likely to have antenatal care, institutional delivery, trained birth attendance, and hygienic care than were controls.
                Birth outcomes in a poor rural population improved greatly through a low cost, potentially sustainable and scalable, participatory intervention with women's groups. A lack of awareness about entitled health and social services may contribute to poor delivery of such services in developing countries, especially among individuals of low socioeconomic status.
                To determine the impact of informing resource-poor rural populations about entitled services.
                Community-based, cluster randomized controlled trial conducted from May 2004 to May 2005 in 105 randomly selected village clusters in Uttar Pradesh state in India. Households (548 intervention and 497 control) were selected by a systematic sampling design, including both low-caste and mid- to high-caste households.
                Four to 6 public meetings were held in each intervention village cluster to disseminate information on entitled health services, entitled education services, and village governance requirements. No intervention took place in control village clusters.
                Visits by nurse midwife; prenatal examinations, tetanus vaccinations, and prenatal supplements received by pregnant women; vaccinations received by infants; excess school fees charged; occurrence of village council meetings; and development work in villages.
                At baseline, there were no significant differences in self-reported delivery of health and social services. After 1 year, intervention villagers reported better delivery of several services compared with control villagers: in a multivariate analysis, 30% more prenatal examinations (95% confidence interval [CI], 17%-43%; P < .001), 27% more tetanus vaccinations (95% CI, 12%-41%; P < .001), 24% more prenatal supplements (95% CI, 8%-39%; P = .003), 25% more infant vaccinations (95% CI, 8%-42%; P = .004), and decreased excess school fees of 8 rupees (95% CI, 4-13 rupees; P < .001). In a difference-in-differences analysis, 21% more village council meetings were reported (95% CI, 5%-36%; P = .01). There were no improvements in visits by a nurse midwife or in development work in the villages. Both low-caste and mid- to high-caste intervention households reported significant improvements in service delivery.
                Informing resource-poor rural populations in India about entitled services enhanced the delivery of health and social services among both low- and mid- to high-caste households. Interventions that emphasize educating resource-poor populations about entitled services may improve the delivery of such services.
                clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00421291. Patient care guidelines are usually implemented one at a time, yet patients are at risk for multiple, often preventable, adverse events simultaneously.
                This study aimed to test the effect of the SAFE or SORRY? programme on the incidence of three adverse events (pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls). This paper describes Part I of the study: the effect on the incidence of adverse events.
                A cluster randomised trial was conducted between September 2006 and November 2008. After a three-month baseline period the intervention was implemented followed by a nine-month follow-up period.
                Ten wards from four hospitals and ten wards from six nursing homes were stratified for institute and ward type and then randomised to intervention or usual care group.
                During baseline and follow-up, patients (≥18 years) with an expected length of stay of at least five days, were asked to participate.
                The SAFE or SORRY? programme consisted of the essential recommendations of guidelines for the three adverse events. A multifaceted implementation strategy was used for the implementation: education, patient involvement and feedback on process and outcome indicators. The usual care group continued care as usual. Data were collected on the incidence of adverse events and a Poisson regression model was used to estimate the rate ratio of the adverse events between the intervention and the usual care group at follow-up.
                At follow-up, 2201 hospital patients with 3358 patient weeks and 392 nursing home patients with 5799 patient weeks were observed. Poisson regression analyses showed a rate ratio for the development of an adverse event in favour of the intervention group of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.34-0.95) and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.48-0.99) for hospital patients and nursing home patients respectively.
                This study showed that implementing multiple guidelines simultaneously is possible, which is promising. Patients in the intervention groups developed 43% and 33% fewer adverse events compared to the usual care groups in hospitals and nursing homes respectively. Even so, more research is necessary to underline these results.
                clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00365430.
                Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. A key component of the DOTS strategy for tuberculosis control (short-course chemotherapy following WHO guidelines) is direct observation of treatment. WHO technical guidelines recommend that health workers should undertake this part of the strategy, but will also accept direct observation of treatment in the community; WHO does not think that a family member should undertake this role. Supporting evidence for these recommendations is not available. The Nepal national tuberculosis programme asked us to develop and test a strategy of direct observation of treatment for the hill districts of Nepal, where direct observation of treatment by health workers is not feasible. We aimed to assess the success rates of two DOTS strategies developed for such areas.
                Between mid-July, 2002, and mid-July, 2003, we undertook a cluster-randomised controlled trial to compare two strategies-community DOTS and family-member DOTS--in ten hill and mountain districts of Nepal. Districts were used as the unit of randomisation. Primary outcome was success rate (proportion of registered patients who achieved cure or completed treatment), and analysis was by intention to treat.
                Five districts (549 patients) were allocated to community DOTS and five (358 patients) were allocated family-member DOTS. Community DOTS and family-member DOTS achieved success rates of 85% and 89%, respectively (odds ratio of success for community DOTS relative to family-member DOTS, 0.67 [95% CI 0.41-1.10]; p=0.09). Estimated case-finding rates were 63% with the community strategy and 44% with family-member DOTS.
                The family-member DOTS and community DOTS strategies can both attain international targets for treatment success under programme conditions, and thus are appropriate for the hill and mountain districts of Nepal. Both strategies might also be appropriate in other parts of the world where directly observed treatment by health workers is not feasible. Our findings lend support to adoption of this patient-responsive approach to direct observation of treatment within global tuberculosis control policy. A major problem with inappropriate use of antibiotics is the emergence of resistance. Thus, cost-effective interventional strategies are required to improve their use. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of multifaceted interventions on prescribing practices of antibiotics in health centers of Khartoum State, Sudan.
                Twenty health centers were randomly assigned to receive: (1) no intervention; (2) audit and feedback; (3) audit and feedback + seminar; or (4) audit and feedback + academic detailing. A total of 1,800 patient encounters, 30 from each health center, were randomly collected. The total number of encounters with antibiotics prescribed were determined in each health center and they were evaluated with regard to antibiotic choice, dose and duration of therapy before the study and at 1 and 3 months post-intervention.
                In comparison to the control group, the prescriber targeted interventions involving audit and feedback, together with academic detailing (4), reduced the mean number of encounters with an antibiotic prescribed by 6.3 and 7.7 (p<0.001) at 1 and 3 months post-intervention, respectively. In addition, the mean number of encounters with an inappropriate antibiotic with respect to diagnosis, doses and/ or duration of therapy was reduced by 5.3 and 5.9 (p<0.001) at 1 and 3 months post-intervention, respectively. For audit and feedback together with seminars (3) and for audit and feedback alone (2), the corresponding reductions were 5.3, 7.1, 4.4 and 5.1 (p<0.001) and 1.4, 2.8, 1.8 and 1.9 (p>0.05), respectively.
                Inappropriate prescribing patterns of antibiotics in health centers of Khartoum State, Sudan, are alarmingly high. Multifaceted interventions involving audit and feedback combined with either academic detailing or seminars appear more effective in changing prescribing practices of antibiotics than audit and feedback alone. We conducted a trial to evaluate the effect of an active, multifaceted educational strategy to promote the use of the WHO Reproductive Health Library (RHL) on obstetric practices.
                Cluster randomised trial. The trial was assigned the International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN14055385.
                Twenty-two hospitals in Mexico City and 18 in the Northeast region of Thailand.
                The intervention consisted primarily of three interactive workshops using RHL over a period of 6 months. The focus of the workshops was to provide access to knowledge and enable its use. A computer and support for using both the computer and RHL were provided at each hospital. The control hospitals did not receive any intervention.
                The main outcome measures were changes in ten selected clinical practices as recommended in RHL starting approximately four to six months after the third workshop. Clinical practice data were collected at each hospital from 1000 consecutively delivered women or for a 6-month period whichever was reached sooner.
                The active, multifaceted educational intervention we employed did not affect the ten targeted practices in a consistent and substantive way. Iron/folate supplementation, uterotonic use after birth and breastfeeding on demand were already frequently practiced, and we were unable to measure external cephalic version. Of the remaining six practices, selective, as opposed to routine episiotomy policy increased in the intervention group (difference in adjusted mean rate = 5.3%; 95% CI -0.1 to 10.7%) in Thailand, and there was a trend towards an increased use of antibiotics at caesarean section in Mexico (difference in adjusted mean rate = 19.0%; 95% CI: -8.0 to 46.0%). There were no differences in the use of labour companionship, magnesium sulphate use for eclampsia, corticosteroids for women delivering before 34 weeks and vacuum extraction. RHL awareness (24.8-65.5% in Mexico and 33.9-83.3% in Thailand) and use (4.8-34.9% in Mexico and 15.5-76.4% in Thailand) increased substantially after the intervention in both countries.
                The multifaceted, active strategy to provide health workers with the knowledge and skills to use RHL to improve their practice led to increased access to and use of RHL, however, no consistent or substantive changes in clinical practices were detected within 4-6 months after the third workshop. Community mobilisation through participatory women's groups might improve birth outcomes in poor rural communities. We therefore assessed this approach in a largely tribal and rural population in three districts in eastern India.
                From 36 clusters in Jharkhand and Orissa, with an estimated population of 228 186, we assigned 18 clusters to intervention or control using stratified randomisation. Women were eligible to participate if they were aged 15-49 years, residing in the project area, and had given birth during the study. In intervention clusters, a facilitator convened 13 groups every month to support participatory action and learning for women, and facilitated the development and implementation of strategies to address maternal and newborn health problems. The primary outcomes were reductions in neonatal mortality rate (NMR) and maternal depression scores. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN21817853.
                After baseline surveillance of 4692 births, we monitored outcomes for 19 030 births during 3 years (2005-08). NMRs per 1000 were 55.6, 37.1, and 36.3 during the first, second, and third years, respectively, in intervention clusters, and 53.4, 59.6, and 64.3, respectively, in control clusters. NMR was 32% lower in intervention clusters adjusted for clustering, stratification, and baseline differences (odds ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.78) during the 3 years, and 45% lower in years 2 and 3 (0.55, 0.46-0.66). Although we did not note a significant effect on maternal depression overall, reduction in moderate depression was 57% in year 3 (0.43, 0.23-0.80).
                This intervention could be used with or as a potential alternative to health-worker-led interventions, and presents new opportunities for policy makers to improve maternal and newborn health outcomes in poor populations.
                Health Foundation, UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, and the Big Lottery Fund (UK).
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Within-study selective reporting is widely believed to exist, although to date there have been no empirical studies to assess the extent of the problem in clinical research. The present study aimed to examine this process.
                We undertook a pilot study, involving a single local research ethics committee (LREC), in which we compared the outcomes, analysis and sample size proposed in the original approved study protocol with the results presented in the subsequent study report.
                We received 41 (73%) replies from lead researchers of 56 projects, which were a complete cohort of clinical research applications approved in a particular time period by the LREC. Fifteen of these projects, which were completed and published at the time of our study, were further investigated. Only six (40%) stated which outcome variables were of primary interest and four (67%) of these showed consistency in the reports. Eight (53%) of the 15 studies mentioned an analysis plan. However, seven (88%) of these eight studies did not follow their prescribed analysis plan: the analysis of outcome variables or associations between certain variables were found to be missing from the report.
                Our pilot study has shown that within-study selective reporting may be examined qualitatively by comparing the study report with the study protocol. Our results suggest that it might well be substantial; however, the bias can only be broadly identified as protocols are not sufficiently precise. The high cost and undesirable consequences of polypharmacy are well-recognized problems among elderly long-term care (LTC) residents. Despite the implementation of the 1987 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, which requires pharmacist review of drug regimens in this setting, medical and drug costs for LTC residents have continued to increase.
                This study evaluates the North Carolina Long-Term Care Polypharmacy Initiative, a large-scale medication therapy management program (MTMP) that combined drug utilization review activities with drug regimen review techniques.
                This was a prospective records-based study that used a difference-in-difference model with both historical and nonintervention group controls. To ensure equivalence among subjects, propensity scoring was used to match study subjects from participating LTC facilities with comparison subjects from nonparticipating facilities. Residents with interventions were grouped for analysis by intervention type-retrospective only, prospective only, or dual type (residents with both prospective and retrospective interventions)-and by intervention stage-review, recommendation, and drug change-plus an all-inclusive "all types" grouping that aggregated groups by intervention type, for a total of 10 total cohorts.
                In the overall population of 5255 study subjects identified, a US $21.63 per member per month drug-cost savings was observed. Although only 1 of 10 cohorts had a change in the number of drug fills, substantial reductions in 2 of 5 types of drug alerts were observed in all 10 cohorts. A reduction in the relative risk for hospitalization (0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-1.00]) was observed in the cohort of residents receiving a retrospective review.
                This Initiative suggests that an MTMP can be quickly launched in a large number of LTC facility residents to produce monetary drug-cost savings and improved health outcomes. Additionally, the evaluation of this program illustrates the utility of using propensity scoring techniques to target future intervention groups in a cost-effective manner.
There are no other studies from other countries other than India and Nepal and there are insufficient data on cost-effectiveness of each procedure. Better evidence is needed before any change may be implemented. Future studies need to have longer-term follow-up and be conducted to minimize biases revealed in this review with a larger sample size to allow examination of adverse events.