Cargando…
Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND: PRESSURE 2 is a randomised evaluation of the clinical and cost effectiveness of two types of pressure relieving mattress for the prevention of pressure ulcers. The primary endpoint is the time to development of a Category ≥2 pressure ulcer. The current ‘gold standard’ for the identificat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5360042/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28320482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1851-5 |
_version_ | 1782516517523423232 |
---|---|
author | McGinnis, Elizabeth Brown, Sarah Collier, Howard Faulks, Phil Gilberts, Rachael Greenwood, Clare Henderson, Valerie Muir, Delia Nelson, Andrea Nixon, Jane Smith, Isabelle Stubbs, Nikki Walker, Kay Wilson, Lyn Coleman, Susanne |
author_facet | McGinnis, Elizabeth Brown, Sarah Collier, Howard Faulks, Phil Gilberts, Rachael Greenwood, Clare Henderson, Valerie Muir, Delia Nelson, Andrea Nixon, Jane Smith, Isabelle Stubbs, Nikki Walker, Kay Wilson, Lyn Coleman, Susanne |
author_sort | McGinnis, Elizabeth |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: PRESSURE 2 is a randomised evaluation of the clinical and cost effectiveness of two types of pressure relieving mattress for the prevention of pressure ulcers. The primary endpoint is the time to development of a Category ≥2 pressure ulcer. The current ‘gold standard’ for the identification of a Category ≥2 pressure ulcer is expert clinical assessment. Due to the appearance of the bed, it is not possible to achieve blinding of the endpoint. This therefore poses a risk to the internal validity of the study. A possible approach is to use photographs of skin sites, with central blinded review. However, there are practical and scientific concerns including whether patients would agree to photographs; the burden of data collection; the quality of photographs; the completeness of data; and how the use of photographs compares with the current ‘gold standard’. This validation sub-study aims to assess and quantify potential bias in the reporting of the trial endpoint. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients will be specifically asked to consent to photographs being taken of their skin sites. Photographs will be taken at first observation or when patients develop a new Category ≥2 pressure ulcer (to assess over-reporting). A 10% random sample of patients will be identified for additional photographs of two skin sites (one torso and one limb) with and without a pressure ulcer (if present) by an independent assessor (to assess the potential for under-reporting). Staff will be trained to take photographs using a standardised camera and photographic technique. A ‘grey scale’ will be included in the photo to correct white balance. Photographs will be securely transferred for central review. Photographs will have white balance corrected, and the computer monitor will be calibrated prior to review. Analysis will include assessment of under- and over-reporting, acceptability of photography to patients, secure transfer of data, quality of and confidence in blinded photograph review and sensitivity analysis using photograph assessment of primary outcome. DISCUSSION: This study will use photographs to contribute to the primary outcome of the trial. It will inform our understanding of the acceptability of photography for prevention trials and the possibility of other uses of photographic data in clinical work and research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN01151335. Registered on 14 May 2013. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1851-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5360042 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53600422017-03-24 Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial McGinnis, Elizabeth Brown, Sarah Collier, Howard Faulks, Phil Gilberts, Rachael Greenwood, Clare Henderson, Valerie Muir, Delia Nelson, Andrea Nixon, Jane Smith, Isabelle Stubbs, Nikki Walker, Kay Wilson, Lyn Coleman, Susanne Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: PRESSURE 2 is a randomised evaluation of the clinical and cost effectiveness of two types of pressure relieving mattress for the prevention of pressure ulcers. The primary endpoint is the time to development of a Category ≥2 pressure ulcer. The current ‘gold standard’ for the identification of a Category ≥2 pressure ulcer is expert clinical assessment. Due to the appearance of the bed, it is not possible to achieve blinding of the endpoint. This therefore poses a risk to the internal validity of the study. A possible approach is to use photographs of skin sites, with central blinded review. However, there are practical and scientific concerns including whether patients would agree to photographs; the burden of data collection; the quality of photographs; the completeness of data; and how the use of photographs compares with the current ‘gold standard’. This validation sub-study aims to assess and quantify potential bias in the reporting of the trial endpoint. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients will be specifically asked to consent to photographs being taken of their skin sites. Photographs will be taken at first observation or when patients develop a new Category ≥2 pressure ulcer (to assess over-reporting). A 10% random sample of patients will be identified for additional photographs of two skin sites (one torso and one limb) with and without a pressure ulcer (if present) by an independent assessor (to assess the potential for under-reporting). Staff will be trained to take photographs using a standardised camera and photographic technique. A ‘grey scale’ will be included in the photo to correct white balance. Photographs will be securely transferred for central review. Photographs will have white balance corrected, and the computer monitor will be calibrated prior to review. Analysis will include assessment of under- and over-reporting, acceptability of photography to patients, secure transfer of data, quality of and confidence in blinded photograph review and sensitivity analysis using photograph assessment of primary outcome. DISCUSSION: This study will use photographs to contribute to the primary outcome of the trial. It will inform our understanding of the acceptability of photography for prevention trials and the possibility of other uses of photographic data in clinical work and research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN01151335. Registered on 14 May 2013. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1851-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5360042/ /pubmed/28320482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1851-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol McGinnis, Elizabeth Brown, Sarah Collier, Howard Faulks, Phil Gilberts, Rachael Greenwood, Clare Henderson, Valerie Muir, Delia Nelson, Andrea Nixon, Jane Smith, Isabelle Stubbs, Nikki Walker, Kay Wilson, Lyn Coleman, Susanne Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title | Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | pressure relieving support surfaces: a randomised evaluation 2 (pressure 2) photographic validation sub-study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5360042/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28320482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1851-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mcginniselizabeth pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT brownsarah pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT collierhoward pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT faulksphil pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT gilbertsrachael pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT greenwoodclare pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT hendersonvalerie pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT muirdelia pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT nelsonandrea pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT nixonjane pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT smithisabelle pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT stubbsnikki pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT walkerkay pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT wilsonlyn pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT colemansusanne pressurerelievingsupportsurfacesarandomisedevaluation2pressure2photographicvalidationsubstudystudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial |