READS
Trial question
What is the impact of an educational intervention designed to improve the accuracy of identification of radiographic criteria for ARDS?
Study design
Multi-center
Open label
RCT
Population
464 patients.
Inclusion criteria: study coordinators in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study.
Key exclusion criteria: no informed consent to participate.
Interventions
N=212 intervention (an online training module followed by a test module).
N=252 control (test module followed by training module).
Primary outcome
Number of correct answers on test module
58%
56%
58.0 %
43.5 %
29.0 %
14.5 %
0.0 %
Intervention
Control
No significant
difference ↔
No significant difference in the number of correct answers on the test module (58% vs. 56%; AD 2%, 95% CI -0.72 to 4.72).
Secondary outcomes
Significant increase in between-rater agreement for all radiographs in the test module (0.296 vs. 0.272; AD 0.024 , 95% CI 0.01 to 0.04).
No significant difference in analysis restricted to physicians (60% vs. 57%; AD 3%, 95% CI -0.47 to 6.47).
No significant difference in the number of correct answers on the test module with equivocal radiographs considered together with consistent radiographs (70% vs. 69%; AD 1%, 95% CI -4.21 to 6.21).
Conclusion
In study coordinators in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure study, intervention was not superior to control with respect to number of correct answers on the test module.
Reference
Shannon L Goddard, Gordon D Rubenfeld, Venika Manoharan et al. The Randomized Educational Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Diagnosis Study: A Trial to Improve the Radiographic Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Crit Care Med. 2018 May;46(5):743-748.
Open reference URL