Shannon L Goddard1,2, Gordon D Rubenfeld1,2, Venika Manoharan1, Shelly P Dev1,2, John Laffey2, Giacomo Bellani3, Tai Pham2,4, Eddy Fan2. 1. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 2. Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy. 4. Groupe hospitalier des Hopitaux Universitaires de l'Est Parisien, Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome have been criticized for poor reliability. Our objective was to test an educational intervention to improve the radiographic identification of acute respiratory distress syndrome by participants in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study centers. SUBJECTS: Study coordinators in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to either an online training module followed by a test module (intervention) or test module followed by training module (control). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the number of radiographs correctly identified as meeting criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome on an online test module (out of 11). Prespecified secondary analyses included a comparison of agreement between the groups and subgroup analyses by profession, age, years of experience, and stated familiarity with diagnostic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Four-hundred sixty-three study participants consented to participate. There was no effect of the intervention on correct answers by participants (proportion correct 58% [intervention] vs 56% [control]; p = 0.15), or in any subgroup analyses. Overall agreement between raters was 0.296 for the intervention and 0.272 for the control (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Participant recognition of radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome was low, with poor agreement. This was not impacted by an educational intervention designed to improve accuracy of identification of radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome have been criticized for poor reliability. Our objective was to test an educational intervention to improve the radiographic identification of acute respiratory distress syndrome by participants in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study centers. SUBJECTS: Study coordinators in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomized to either an online training module followed by a test module (intervention) or test module followed by training module (control). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the number of radiographs correctly identified as meeting criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome on an online test module (out of 11). Prespecified secondary analyses included a comparison of agreement between the groups and subgroup analyses by profession, age, years of experience, and stated familiarity with diagnostic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Four-hundred sixty-three study participants consented to participate. There was no effect of the intervention on correct answers by participants (proportion correct 58% [intervention] vs 56% [control]; p = 0.15), or in any subgroup analyses. Overall agreement between raters was 0.296 for the intervention and 0.272 for the control (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Participant recognition of radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome was low, with poor agreement. This was not impacted by an educational intervention designed to improve accuracy of identification of radiographic criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Authors: Maurizio Cereda; Yi Xin; Alberto Goffi; Jacob Herrmann; David W Kaczka; Brian P Kavanagh; Gaetano Perchiazzi; Takeshi Yoshida; Rahim R Rizi Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Robinder G Khemani; Lincoln Smith; Yolanda M Lopez-Fernandez; Jeni Kwok; Rica Morzov; Margaret J Klein; Nadir Yehya; Douglas Willson; Martin C J Kneyber; Jon Lillie; Analia Fernandez; Christopher J L Newth; Philippe Jouvet; Neal J Thomas Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Yolanda M López-Fernández; Lincoln S Smith; Joseph G Kohne; Jason P Weinman; Vicent Modesto-Alapont; Susana B Reyes-Dominguez; Alberto Medina; Byron E Piñeres-Olave; Natalie Mahieu; Margaret J Klein; Heidi R Flori; Philippe Jouvet; Robinder G Khemani Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Laura A Hagens; Nanon F L Heijnen; Marry R Smit; Alwin R M Verschueren; Tamara M E Nijsen; Inge Geven; Marcus J Schultz; Dennis C J J Bergmans; Ronny M Schnabel; Lieuwe D J Bos Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2021-08
Authors: Laura A Hagens; Fleur L I M Van der Ven; Nanon F L Heijnen; Marry R Smit; Hester A Gietema; Suzanne C Gerretsen; Marcus J Schultz; Dennis C J J Bergmans; Ronny M Schnabel; Lieuwe D J Bos Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-08-31