NCT06480487

Brief Summary

The investigators will use two phases of Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) - preparation and optimization phases. In the preparation phase, Audit and Feedback (AnF) intervention will be prepared. First, the investigators will use scoping review to develop conceptual frameworks for AnF components. The outcome indicators and resource constraints for intervention will be identified based on the literature reviews. Second, an expert consultation meeting will be conducted to develop a set of candidate components for the AnF intervention. Around 10 relevant scholars and primary healthcare workers will be invited to rank the components that researchers conclude from the literature. The top 7 ranked components will be assessed by Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) questionnaires to finally identify 3 key components for AnF intervention. In the optimization phase, the investigators will identify AnF intervention that will lead to the best desired results within key resource constraints in terms of effectiveness , efficiency, economy and scalability. First, the investigators will realistically and comprehensively assess the quality of care provided by primary healthcare facilities of the four Low and Middle Income countries (LMICs) using USP. Second, a 2×2×2 factorial design (RCT) will be conducted to determine how the results of quality of care can be fed back to primary healthcare workers in the four LMICs in order to optimize the impact of improving healthcare quality. To achieve this goal, the factorial trial will involve the 3 identified key AnF components at 2 levels each, for a total of 8 intervention groups (i.e. 8 different ways to conduct audit and feedback). By randomly assigning healthcare facilities to one of these 8 different ways to conduct audit and feedback, the investigators can obtain the change in the quality of care after implementing audit and feedback interventions in these facilities. Then, through statistical analysis, the investigators can estimate main and interaction effects for AnF components on improving the quality of primary health care. After that, the optimal combination of AnF components will be determined by trade off of the effects of AnF components and resource constraints in local primary healthcare implementation settings. Study details are as follows.

Trial Health

35
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
344

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable hypertension

Timeline
Completed

Started May 2025

Shorter than P25 for not_applicable hypertension

Status
not yet recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

June 17, 2024

Completed
11 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

June 28, 2024

Completed
10 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

May 1, 2025

Completed
5 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

September 30, 2025

Completed
1 month until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

October 31, 2025

Completed
Last Updated

April 27, 2025

Status Verified

April 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

5 months

First QC Date

June 17, 2024

Last Update Submit

April 23, 2025

Conditions

Keywords

Audit and feedbackQuality of carePrimary health care

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • The proportion of completed guideline-recommended quality checklist items for consultation of hypertension cases and Type II diabetes cases of the primary healthcare (PHC) providers among all of the items

    The primary outcome is a continuous score ranging from 0 to 100%. It will be assessed by Unannounced Standardized Patients (USPs).

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

Secondary Outcomes (8)

  • The proportion of completed guideline-recommended quality checklist items for physical and laboratory exams of hypertension cases and Type II diabetes cases of the PHC providers among all of the items

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

  • Correctness of diagnosis of hypertension cases and type II diabetes cases by PHC providers

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

  • Correctness of treatment of hypertension cases and type II diabetes cases by PHC providers

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

  • Timeliness of hypertension and type II diabetes services in primary healthcare settings.

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

  • Patient-centered quality of healthcare in primary healthcare settings.

    An average of 1 month and 3 months

  • +3 more secondary outcomes

Study Arms (8)

Face to face by researchers with peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided face-to-face by the researchers by visiting health facilities. The feedback report will include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided face to faceBehavioral: Feedback provided by researchersBehavioral: Feedback provided with peer comparision

Face to face by authoritative bodies with peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided face-to-face by the authoritative bodies by visiting health facilities. The feedback report will include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided face to faceBehavioral: Feedback provided by authoritative bodiesBehavioral: Feedback provided with peer comparision

Face to face by researchers without peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided face-to-face by the researchers by visiting health facilities. The feedback report will not include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided face to faceBehavioral: Feedback provided by researchersBehavioral: Feedback provided without peer comparision

Electronic mail by researchers with peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided through electronic mail by the researchers. The feedback report will include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided by electronic mailBehavioral: Feedback provided by researchersBehavioral: Feedback provided with peer comparision

Face to face by authoritative bodies without peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided face-to-face by the authoritative bodies by visiting health facilities. The feedback report will not include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided face to faceBehavioral: Feedback provided by authoritative bodiesBehavioral: Feedback provided without peer comparision

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies with peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided through electronic mail by the authoritative bodies. The feedback report will include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided by electronic mailBehavioral: Feedback provided by authoritative bodiesBehavioral: Feedback provided with peer comparision

Electronic mail by researchers without peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided through electronic mail by the researchers. The feedback report will not include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided by electronic mailBehavioral: Feedback provided by researchersBehavioral: Feedback provided without peer comparision

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies without peer comparision

EXPERIMENTAL

Feedback will be provided through electronic mail by the authoritative bodies. The feedback report will not include peer comparison data.

Behavioral: Feedback provided by electronic mailBehavioral: Feedback provided by authoritative bodiesBehavioral: Feedback provided without peer comparision

Interventions

Feedback will be provided face-to-face.

Face to face by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionFace to face by authoritative bodies without peer comparisionFace to face by researchers with peer comparisionFace to face by researchers without peer comparision

Feedback will be provided by electronic mail.

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionElectronic mail by authoritative bodies without peer comparisionElectronic mail by researchers with peer comparisionElectronic mail by researchers without peer comparision

Feedback will be provided by researchers.

Electronic mail by researchers with peer comparisionElectronic mail by researchers without peer comparisionFace to face by researchers with peer comparisionFace to face by researchers without peer comparision

Feedback will be provided by authoritative bodies.

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionElectronic mail by authoritative bodies without peer comparisionFace to face by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionFace to face by authoritative bodies without peer comparision

Feedback will be provided with peer comparison.

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionElectronic mail by researchers with peer comparisionFace to face by authoritative bodies with peer comparisionFace to face by researchers with peer comparision

Feedback will be provided without peer comparision.

Electronic mail by authoritative bodies without peer comparisionElectronic mail by researchers without peer comparisionFace to face by authoritative bodies without peer comparisionFace to face by researchers without peer comparision

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 80 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

MeSH Terms

Conditions

HypertensionDiabetes Mellitus

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Vascular DiseasesCardiovascular DiseasesGlucose Metabolism DisordersMetabolic DiseasesNutritional and Metabolic DiseasesEndocrine System Diseases

Study Officials

  • Dong Xu

    Southern Medical Univerity

    STUDY DIRECTOR

Central Study Contacts

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Masking Details
The data analysis will be done by a team and those team members will be masked on the intervention provided.
Purpose
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
Intervention Model
FACTORIAL
Model Details: A 2×2×2 factorial design will be conducted, with three two-level components making up a total of 8 groups of AnF interventions. The sample population will be randomly assigned to these 8 intervention groups, stratified by countries and regions.
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Post Doctoral Researcher

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

June 17, 2024

First Posted

June 28, 2024

Study Start

May 1, 2025

Primary Completion

September 30, 2025

Study Completion

October 31, 2025

Last Updated

April 27, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-04

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share