Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jul 18;19(1):156. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0794-9.

Readiness assessment for pragmatic trials (RAPT): a model to assess the readiness of an intervention for testing in a pragmatic trial.

Author information

1
Center for Long-Term Care Quality & Innovation, Brown University School of Public Health, Box G-S121-6, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02912, USA. Rosa_Baier@Brown.edu.
2
Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Box G-S121-6, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02912, USA. Rosa_Baier@Brown.edu.
3
Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Box G-S121-6, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02912, USA.
4
Center for Gerontology & Healthcare Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Box G-S121-6, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI, 02912, USA.
5
Center for Gerontology & Healthcare Practice, 1200 Centre Street, Boston, MA, 02131, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (PCTs) test the effectiveness of interventions implemented in routine clinical practice. Because PCT findings are generalizable, this approach is gaining momentum among interventionists and funding agencies seeking to accelerate the testing and adoption of evidence-based strategies to improve care and outcomes. Particular attention is being paid to non-pharmacological interventions, which are often complex and may be difficult to uniformly implement across multiple sites. While many such non-pharmacological interventions have proven efficacious in small trials, most have not been widely adopted. PCTs could accelerate effectiveness testing and adoption, yet there are no established criteria to identify interventions ready for testing in a PCT.

METHODS:

We convened 30 interventionists and healthcare leaders to identify criteria to assess the readiness of non-pharmacological interventions for PCTs. Based on this discussion, we created a model with multiple domains, qualitative scoring guidelines for each domain, and a graphical summary of readiness assessments. All workshop participants had an opportunity to review and comment on the resulting model; three piloted it with their own interventions. Several other experts also provided input.

RESULTS:

The Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials (RAPT) model enables interventionists to assess an intervention's readiness for PCTs. RAPT includes nine domains: implementation protocol, evidence, risk, feasibility, measurement, cost, acceptability, alignment, and impact. Domains reflect a range of considerations regarding the feasibility of successfully employing PCT methods and the prospect of an intervention's widespread adoption, if proven effective. Individuals evaluating an intervention are asked to qualitatively assess each domain from low to high readiness. In this report, we provide assessment guidelines and examples of scored interventions.

CONCLUSIONS:

RAPT is the first model to help interventionists and funders assess the extent to which interventions are ready for PCTs. Scoring efficacious interventions using RAPT can inform research team discussions regarding whether or not to advance an intervention to effectiveness testing using a PCT and how do design that PCTs.

KEYWORDS:

Effectiveness; Framework; Implementation science; Model; Pragmatic clinical trial; Pragmatic trial; Translational research

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center