Methods: This open label comparative design study randomized health professional clinicians to receive "practice points" on tendinopathy management via Twitter or Facebook. Evaluated outcomes included knowledge change and self-reported changes to clinical practice.
Results: Four hundred and ninety-four participants were randomized to 1 of 2 groups and 317 responders analyzed. Both groups demonstrated improvements in knowledge and reported changes to clinical practice. There was no statistical difference between groups for the outcomes of knowledge change (P = .728), changes to clinical practice (P = .11) or the increased use of research information (P = .89). Practice points were shared more by the Twitter group (P
METHODS: 192 patients with MTBI and ICH were treated between November 2019 to December 2020 at a single level II trauma center. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was used to classify MTBI, and initial head CT was performed according to the Canadian CT head rule. Patients with a higher risk of ICH progression, including the elderly (≥65 years old), patients on antiplatelets or anticoagulants, or patients with an initial head CT that revealed EDH, contusional bleeding, or SDH > 5 mm, and multiple ICH underwent a repeat head CT within 12 to 24 h later. Data regarding types of intervention, length of stay in the hospital, and outcome were collected. The risk of further neurological deterioration and readmission rates were compared between these two groups. All patients were followed up in the clinic after one month or contacted via phone if they did not return.
RESULTS: 189 patients underwent scheduled repeated head CT, 18% had radiological intracranial bleed progression, and 82% had no changes. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of intervention rate, risk of neurological deterioration in the future, or readmission between them.
CONCLUSION: Repeat head CT in mild TBI patients with no neurological deterioration is not recommended, even in patients with a higher risk of ICH progression.
METHODS: This study is a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, parallel-group, matched pair, controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment. Randomisation is performed using a computer-generated table with a 1:1 allocation comparing the SIMSP and the POHP involving 28 preschools in the Kampar district, Perak, Malaysia. The intervention consists of preschool visits by a group of dental therapists, in-class oral health lessons and daily toothbrushing conducted by class teacher, child home toothbrushing supervised by parents, and infographic oral health messages to parents. The control consists of the existing POHP that involves preschool visits by a group of dental therapists only. The trial lasts for 6 months. Primary outcome variable is the mean plaque score change after 6 months. To determine the feasibility of the SIMSP, a process evaluation will be conducted using the perspectives of dental therapists, teachers, and parents on the appropriateness, effectiveness, facilitators, and barriers to the SIMSP implementation as well as an audit trail to assess the trial intervention.
DISCUSSION: Cluster randomisation may lead to a random effect and cluster selection bias. These factors will be accounted for when analysing the data and interpreting the outcomes. The effectiveness of the SIMSP will be evaluated by comparing the results with those of the POHP.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04339647 . Registered on 5 April 2020 - Retrospectively registered.