Practice facilitation for improving cardiovascular care: secondary evaluation of a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial using population-based administrative data

Deri Armstrong, Catherine; Taljaard, Monica; Hogg, William; Mark, Amy E.; Liddy, Clare

doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1547-2

Trials

Table 4 Pairwise least square mean comparisons between intervention conditions from primary outcome analysis and three robustness analyses

From: Practice facilitation for improving cardiovascular care: secondary evaluation of a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial using population-based administrative data

	Unadjusted			Adjusted for patient characteristics			Adjusted for patient and physician
	OR	99 % CI	p value	OR	99 % CI	P value	OR	99 % CI	P value
a) Primary outcome analysis: any CVD hospitalization (Yes/No) ( N = 262,996) ¹
Post vs. intervention	0.98	0.86–1.12	0.73	0.96	0.85 − 1.10	0.48	0.96	0.84 − 1.10	0.46
Intervention vs. baseline	0.96	0.83 − 1.12	0.51	0.96	0.83 − 1.12	0.50	0.96	0.83 − 1.11	0.49
Post vs. baseline	0.95	0.76 − 1.18	0.51	0.93	0.75 − 1.15	0.37	0.93	0.74 − 1.15	0.36
	Unadjusted			Adjusted for patient characteristics			Adjusted for patient and physician
	RR	99 % CI	p value	RR	99 % CI	p value	RR	99 % CI	p value
b) Number of CVD hospitalizations per year ( N = 262,996) ²
Post vs. intervention	0.99	0.84 − 1.19	0.99	0.97	0.82 − 1.15	0.72	0.97	0.83 − 1.15	0.76
Intervention vs. baseline	0.96	0.83 − 1.12	0.61	0.95	0.83 − 1.19	0.50	0.95	0.83 − 1.09	0.46
Post vs. baseline	0.96	0.72 − 1.28	0.78	0.92	0.71 − 1.21	0.57	0.93	0.71 − 1.21	0.56
	Unadjusted			Adjusted for patient characteristics			Adjusted for patient and physician
	OR	99 % CI	p value	OR	99 % CI	p value	OR	99 % CI	P value
c) Primary outcome analysis of diabetic patient subsample ( N = 89,433) ³
Intervention vs. baseline	1.09	0.88 − 1.36	0.29	1.09	0.87 − 1.36	0.33	0.97	0.79 − 1.18	0.70
Post vs. baseline	1.11	0.80 − 1.54	0.40	1.07	0.77 − 1.49	0.58	1.09	0.87 − .36	0.34
Post vs. intervention	1.02	0.83 − 1.24	0.84	0.99	0.81 − 1.20	0.86	1.05	0.76 − 1.46	0.68
	Unadjusted			Adjusted for patient characteristics			Adjusted for patient and physician
	OR	99 % CI	p value	OR	99 % CI	p value	OR	99 % CI	P value
d) Primary outcome analysis excluding patients only at risk of CVD ( N = 132,686) ⁴
Intervention vs. baseline	1.04	0.89 − 1.21	0.56	1.01	0.87 − 1.18	0.85	1.00	0.86 − 1.17	0.98
Post vs. baseline	1.06	0.89 − 1.25	0.42	1.05	0.89 − 1.25	0.44	1.05	0.88 − 1.25	0.44
Post vs. intervention	1.09	0.85 − 1.41	0.37	1.07	0.83 − 1.38	0.52	1.05	0.82 − 1.36	0.59

CI confidence interval. CVD cardiovascular disease. OR odds ratio. RR relative risk
¹Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, accounting for clustering by practice and provider
²Negative binomial regression analysis using robust standard errors accounting for clustering by practice
³Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, accounting for clustering by practice and provider
⁴Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, accounting for clustering by practice and provider

Back to article page

ISSN: 1745-6215

Contact us

Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com