Wiki Head CT Choice Study: Adaptation of US Two Decision Aids to a Québec Local Context

Laval University

Status: Unknown

Conditions: Emergencies; Mild Traumatic Brain Injury; Decision-making

Treatments: Device: Real-life clinical meetings

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT04140084

2017-393 - WikiDécisionTDM

Details and patient eligibility

About

This study aims to adapt two decision aids (DAs) (pediatric and adult) developed in the United States to the Quebec context to develop context-adapted tools and training program that will facilitate the process of shared decision-making while taking a decision to use head computed tomography (CT scan) with patients suffering from a mild traumatic brain injury.

Full description

Background: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is among the most common neurological conditions with an estimated annual incidence rate of 450 to 650/100,000 in Canada. Head computed tomography (CT) scans are used as the reference standard test to rule out life-threatening complications, such as intracranial hemorrhage, but present potential exposition risks for the patient. Despite the use of clinical decision rules (Canadian Head CT Rule; Pediatric Head Injury/Trauma Algorithm (PECARN)), head CTs remain overused. Two decision aids (pediatric and adult) developed in the United States (U.S.) may help reduce the use of CTs for mTBI.

The goal of this study is to address the challenges of adapting two existing decision aids to local contexts. Stakeholders, including patients, or parents of patients, will be involved in adapting and validating the two existing decision aids to a local context and to create a training program about shared decision-making (SDM) in trauma care.

Objectives:

1. Translate two decision aids for head CTs (pediatric and adult) developed in the United States and adapt them to the Quebec context;
2. Create training for Emergency Medicine professionals on adopting decision aids with mTBI patients;
3. Measure the appropriate use of CTs in two hospitals(CHU de Sainte-Justine, Hotel-Dieu de Levis) before implementing the tools.

Methods:

Phase 1 will be the translation and adaptation of two decision aids to support decision-making about performing a head CT for adult and pediatric mTBI using an iterative user-centered approach. (Translation of the decision aids on the use of CT scans for mTBI (pediatric and adult) produced in the United States; simple ethnographic observation of the interactions of emergency health professionals and mTBI patients to understand the needs of patients, family members and health professionals in deciding to conduct a head CT for mTBI patients for the redesign of the tools; rapid prototyping of our different decision aids using interviews and real-life clinical encounters.)

Phase 2 will be the development of a training session for healthcare professionals.

Phase 3 will be a retrospective analysis of medical records to evaluate the use of head CT for mTBI patients in two hospitals (pediatric and adult).

Expected results:

This study will adapt two decision aids to the context of trauma care in Quebec and create a training program about shared decision-making and decision aids in the context of the care of mTBI patients. The final content and user interface of the decision aid/training session will be influenced by the multiple comments received from the participants in this study. This novel online and in -person training program will be instrumental in implementing our novel decision aid in practice. The results generated from the implementation of the intervention will help other centers in Quebec, Canada and abroad use the educational program and decision aid. The results of this research project will contribute to the enhancement of many research fields such as the involvement of end- users in the development process of decision aids. This research project will offer new learning opportunities for graduate students to study how collaboration among multiple stakeholders can improve patient outcomes and how to develop patient- centered tools that respond to their needs and those of the clinicians that care for them. Finally, this project will advance our understanding of the use of shared decision-making and decision aids in the field of trauma care.

Enrollment: 40 estimated patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18+ years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Rapid-prototyping steps:

Inclusion criteria:

• For the pediatric decision aid: Parents seeking care for a child or an adolescent that are less than 18 years old. The child must have experienced blunt head trauma (above the eyebrows and not isolated to face or eyes).The child must have at least one of the PECARN risk factors for clinically important TBI (except for the two higher risk variables of altered mental status or signs of skull fracture).
• For the adult decision aid: Adult participants that have had a diagnosis of mTBI before the interview or having a mTBI to be diagnosed by the physician at the moment and needs to make a decision about having a CTs.
• Eligible clinicians will be attending physicians, fellows, and residents caring for children or adult with minor head trauma.

Exclusion criteria:

• For the pediatric decision aid: Suspected case of child abuse.
• For the adult decision aid: No exclusion criteria.

Retrospective analysis:

Inclusion criteria:

• Children that have experienced blunt head trauma (above the eyebrows and not isolated to face or eyes).
• Children that have at least one of the PECARN risk factors for clinically important TBI (except for the two higher risk variables of altered mental status or signs of skull fracture).
• Adults who have experienced blunt head trauma (above the eyebrows and not isolated to face or eyes) within 24 hours without any of the high risk or medium risk CCHR criteria that mandate performing a head CT.

Exclusion criteria:

• Children with signs of skull fracture, GCS < 15 or other signs of altered mental status, brain tumour, penetrating head trauma, bleeding disorder or coagulopathy, ventricular shunt, preexisting neurological disease, syncope or seizure that preceded the head trauma, transferred to the ED with imaging already obtained, known pregnancy, suspected abuse, or > 2 PECARN risk factors.
• Adults that have a Glasgow coma scale less than 13, an obvious open skull fracture, take oral anticoagulants, or antiplatelet agents (excluding aspirin), or have a bleeding disorder, no causal factor of trauma (i.e. epilepsy, cardiac arrest), pregnancy, came back to emergency for the same head injury, no symptoms of head injury.

Trial design

Primary purpose: Health Services Research

Allocation: Non-Randomized

Interventional model: Sequential Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

40 participants in 5 patient groups

Translation, Redesign and Rapid prototyping with clinicians

No Intervention group

Description:

This step includes a translation of the tools (English to French) and a redesign work of the original tools. Then, the study will include clinicians (at least 20) from two healthcare settings (CHU Sainte-Justine, and the CISSS-CA (Hotel-Dieu de Levis). After a presentation of the two tools during the Emergency Physicians' departmental meetings, the written comments about the prototype version will be collected. A revision of the prototypes is scheduled at the end of this step.

Rapid prototyping with patients

No Intervention group

Description:

This step will include the assessment of the tools by patients (or parents of patients) that have had a previous mTBI at the CISSS-CA (Hotel-Dieu de Levis). The comments about the adult and pediatric prototypes (5 adult patients, 5 parents of pediatric patients) will be collected through interviews. A revision of the prototypes is scheduled at the end of this step.

Real-life clinical meetings

Experimental group

Description:

This step will include a presentation of the tools to 5 emergency physicians so that they can use the tools with patients (5 adults, 5 parents of pediatric patients) in a realistic setting to identify any problems of use. The clinicians and patients that had used the tools during the clinical encounters will be then met during cognitive interviews to collect their comments on the tools and to address any usability issues. A final revision of the prototypes is scheduled at the end of this step.

Treatment:

Device: Real-life clinical meetings

Training session developement

No Intervention group

Description:

This step includes the development of a training session on how to perform SDM with patients facing the decision to undergo head CTs for mTBI and about how to use our newly developed decision aids in this clinical setting. The content of the training session will be adapted to the needs, goals, strengths and limitations observed during the focus groups (departmental meetings) exploring health professionals' barriers to using a decision aid about head CTs in mTBI. The expertise of SAVIE (www.savie.ca) in producing online and interactive elearning programs will be mobilized in order to produce a training program that will integrate the content the investigators will have identified as the main skills, knowledge and competencies needing development among our health professionals to stimulate the use of SDM and our decision aids. SAVIE will produce a virtual elearning program adaptable to all media (PC, mobile device, tablet) and different health professionals.

Retrospective analysis

No Intervention group

Description:

This step will retrospectively analyze the medical records of traumatic brain injury adult patients (adult, 350, Hotel-Dieu de Levis) and pediatric patients (406, CHU de Sainte-Justine and Hotel-Dieu de Levis)) randomly selected throughout the year preceding this study in each of the two centers to determine the rate of head CT ordering, the head CT result and the appropriateness of having ordered the head CT based on the CCHR and PECARN criteria. One reviewer will judge the appropriateness of having done a CT scan according to the CCHR and PECARN criteria based on a structured extraction form that will previously be approved by the study's steering committee. To ensure validity, 10% of the analysis will be reviewed by an expert. The reviewer will look at prehospital data collection, triage information, physician's notes, nursing notes and head CT requisition form information to determine if any of the clinical decision rule criteria are present.