Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Nov 22;22(1):828.
doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05788-3.

Statistical analysis plan for the Steppedwedge Cluster Randomized trial of Electronic Early Notification of sepsis in hospitalized ward patients (SCREEN)

Yaseen M Arabi  1 , Ramesh Kumar Vishwakarma  2   3 , Hasan M Al-Dorzi  4 , Eman Al Qasim  4 , Sheryl Ann Abdukahil  4 , Fawaz K Al-Rabeah  5 , Huda Al Ghamdi  5 , Ebtisam Al Ghamdi  5 ; SCREEN Trial Group
Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Statistical analysis plan for the Steppedwedge Cluster Randomized trial of Electronic Early Notification of sepsis in hospitalized ward patients (SCREEN)

Yaseen M Arabi et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Background: It is unclear whether screening for sepsis using an electronic alert in hospitalized ward patients improves outcomes. The objective of the Stepped-wedge Cluster Randomized Trial of Electronic Early Notification of Sepsis in Hospitalized Ward Patients (SCREEN) trial is to evaluate whether an electronic screening for sepsis compared to no screening among hospitalized ward patients reduces all-cause 90-day in-hospital mortality.

Methods and design: This study is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in which the unit of randomization or cluster is the hospital ward. An electronic alert for sepsis was developed in the electronic medical record (EMR), with the feature of being active (visible to treating team) or masked (inactive in EMR frontend for the treating team but active in the backend of the EMR). Forty-five clusters in 5 hospitals are randomized into 9 sequences of 5 clusters each to receive the intervention (active alert) over 10 periods, 2 months each, the first being the baseline period. Data are extracted from EMR and are compared between the intervention (active alert) and control group (masked alert). During the study period, some of the hospital wards were allocated to manage patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome of all-cause hospital mortality by day 90 will be compared using a generalized linear mixed model with a binary distribution and a log-link function to estimate the relative risk as a measure of effect. We will include two levels of random effects to account for nested clustering within wards and periods and two levels of fixed effects: hospitals and COVID-19 ward status in addition to the intervention. Results will be expressed as relative risk with a 95% confidence interval.

Conclusion: The SCREEN trial provides an opportunity for a novel trial design and analysis of routinely collected and entered data to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention (alert) for a common medical problem (sepsis in ward patients). In this statistical analysis plan, we outline details of the planned analyses in advance of trial completion. Prior specification of the statistical methods and outcome analysis will facilitate unbiased analyses of these important clinical data.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04078594 . Registered on September 6, 2019.

Keywords: Alert; Electronic medical records; Mortality; Screening; Sepsis; qSOFA.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient flow according to the CONSORT flowchart
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, Antonelli M, Coopersmith CM, French C, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Intensive Care Med. 2021;47(11):1181-247. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Levy MM, Evans LE, Rhodes A. The surviving sepsis campaign bundle: 2018 update. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(6):925–928. doi: 10.1007/s00134-018-5085-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. New Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1368–1377. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa010307. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Makam AN, Nguyen OK, Auerbach AD. Diagnostic accuracy and effectiveness of automated electronic sepsis alert systems: a systematic review. J Hosp Med. 2015;10(6):396–402. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2347. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arabi YM, Alsaawi A, Al Zahrani M, Al Khathaami AM, AlHazme RH, Al Mutrafy A, et al. Electronic early notification of sepsis in hospitalized ward patients: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2021;22(1):695. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05562-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data