Implementation of treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis through a Learning Collaborative: Rationale and design of the TRACTION trial

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Daniel H. Solomon ; MD ; MPH^a ; ^{dsolomon@partners.org" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Sara B. Lee ; MPH^a ; Agnes Zak ; BS^a ; Cassandra Corrigan ; BA^a ; Jenifer Agosti ; MPP^b ; Asaf Bitton ; MD ; MPH^c ; Leslie Harrold ; MD ; MPH^d ; Elena Losina ; PhD^e ; Bing Lu ; DrPH^a ; Ted Pincus ; MD^f ; Helga Radner ; MD^g ; Josef Smolen ; MD^g ; Jeffrey N Katz ; MD ; MS^a ; ^e ; Liana Fraenkel ; MD ; MPH^h
• 关键词：Rheumatoid arthritis ; Treat to target ; Learning collaborative ; Quality improvement ; Randomized controlled trial
• 刊名：Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：August 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：46
• 期：1
• 页码：81-87
• 全文大小：664 K

文摘

Treat-to-target (TTT) is a recommended strategy in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but various data sources suggest that its uptake in routine care in the US is suboptimal. Herein, we describe the design of a randomized controlled trial of a Learning Collaborative to facilitate implementation of TTT.

Methods

We recruited 11 rheumatology sites from across the US and randomized them into the following two groups: one received the Learning Collaborative intervention in Phase 1 (month 1–9) and the second formed a wait-list control group to receive the intervention in Phase 2 (months 10–18). The Learning Collaborative intervention was designed using the Model for Improvement, consisting of a Change Package with corresponding principles and action phases. Phase 1 intervention practices had nine learning sessions, collaborated using a web-based tool, and shared results of plan–do–study–act cycles and monthly improvement metrics collected at each practice. The wait-list control group sites had no intervention during Phase 1. The primary trial outcome is the implementation of TTT as measured by chart review, comparing the differences from baseline to end of Phase 1, between intervention and control sites.

Results

All intervention sites remained engaged in the Learning Collaborative throughout Phase 1, with a total of 38 providers participating. The primary trial outcome measures are currently being collected by the study team through medical record review.

Conclusions

If the Learning Collaborative is an effective means for improving implementation of TTT, this strategy could serve as a way of implementing disseminating TTT more widely.