A checklist that enhances the provision of education during insulin initiation simulation

A randomized controlled trial

Charles G. Taylor (Lead / Corresponding author), K. Bynoe, A. Worme, I. Hambleton, A. Atherley, Adrian Husbands, N. Unwin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: The study tested the hypothesis that doctors using an insulin information checklist during simulated insulin initiation would impart more information regarding insulin use. 

Methods: A total of 128 simulations were conducted. Doctors (n = 64) were recruited from practitioners recently completing internship (n = 19) and those established in primary care (n = 45). Both groups of doctors were strata randomized to control (n = 32) and intervention groups (n = 32), so that each group contained equal numbers. Doctors in each group experienced two identical simulations of insulin initiation with an intervening period of 10 min. Doctors in the intervention arm were introduced to an insulin initiation checklist, which they reviewed independently and utilized in the second simulation. Trained assessors captured the provision of education in 21 predefined educational areas. Differences in the change of the total education provided between the first and second simulations were assessed using linear regression. 

Results: The difference in the mean change of education provided between the first and second simulations within the 21 educational areas for the control and treatment groups was 9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.8-11.1, P < 0.001] - an increase of 46.2%. The difference for the 15 areas relevant to pen use was 7.3 (95% CI: 6.2-8.4, P < 0.001) - an increase of 51.6%. 

Conclusions: The checklist resulted in doctors providing significantly more education applicable to syringe and insulin pen routes of insulin administration during simulations. Further research is needed on the checklist's impact on healthcare professionals and patient outcomes in the clinical context.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1204-1210
Number of pages7
JournalDiabetic Medicine
Volume33
Issue number9
Early online date4 Sep 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2016

Fingerprint

Checklist
Randomized Controlled Trials
Insulin
Education
Confidence Intervals
Syringes
Internship and Residency
Linear Models
Primary Health Care
Delivery of Health Care
Control Groups
Research

Cite this

Taylor, Charles G. ; Bynoe, K. ; Worme, A. ; Hambleton, I. ; Atherley, A. ; Husbands, Adrian ; Unwin, N. / A checklist that enhances the provision of education during insulin initiation simulation : A randomized controlled trial. In: Diabetic Medicine. 2016 ; Vol. 33, No. 9. pp. 1204-1210.
@article{c150a894cd194333988c3f9585c7c3f8,
title = "A checklist that enhances the provision of education during insulin initiation simulation: A randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Aim: The study tested the hypothesis that doctors using an insulin information checklist during simulated insulin initiation would impart more information regarding insulin use. Methods: A total of 128 simulations were conducted. Doctors (n = 64) were recruited from practitioners recently completing internship (n = 19) and those established in primary care (n = 45). Both groups of doctors were strata randomized to control (n = 32) and intervention groups (n = 32), so that each group contained equal numbers. Doctors in each group experienced two identical simulations of insulin initiation with an intervening period of 10 min. Doctors in the intervention arm were introduced to an insulin initiation checklist, which they reviewed independently and utilized in the second simulation. Trained assessors captured the provision of education in 21 predefined educational areas. Differences in the change of the total education provided between the first and second simulations were assessed using linear regression. Results: The difference in the mean change of education provided between the first and second simulations within the 21 educational areas for the control and treatment groups was 9.7 [95{\%} confidence interval (CI): 8.8-11.1, P < 0.001] - an increase of 46.2{\%}. The difference for the 15 areas relevant to pen use was 7.3 (95{\%} CI: 6.2-8.4, P < 0.001) - an increase of 51.6{\%}. Conclusions: The checklist resulted in doctors providing significantly more education applicable to syringe and insulin pen routes of insulin administration during simulations. Further research is needed on the checklist's impact on healthcare professionals and patient outcomes in the clinical context.",
author = "Taylor, {Charles G.} and K. Bynoe and A. Worme and I. Hambleton and A. Atherley and Adrian Husbands and N. Unwin",
note = "The study was supported by a grant from the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados. The Barbados Diabetes Education Task Force and the Diabetes Association of Barbados also provided funding.",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1111/dme.12956",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "1204--1210",
journal = "Diabetic Medicine",
issn = "0742-3071",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "9",

}

A checklist that enhances the provision of education during insulin initiation simulation : A randomized controlled trial. / Taylor, Charles G. (Lead / Corresponding author); Bynoe, K.; Worme, A.; Hambleton, I.; Atherley, A.; Husbands, Adrian; Unwin, N.

In: Diabetic Medicine, Vol. 33, No. 9, 09.2016, p. 1204-1210.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A checklist that enhances the provision of education during insulin initiation simulation

T2 - A randomized controlled trial

AU - Taylor, Charles G.

AU - Bynoe, K.

AU - Worme, A.

AU - Hambleton, I.

AU - Atherley, A.

AU - Husbands, Adrian

AU - Unwin, N.

N1 - The study was supported by a grant from the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados. The Barbados Diabetes Education Task Force and the Diabetes Association of Barbados also provided funding.

PY - 2016/9

Y1 - 2016/9

N2 - Aim: The study tested the hypothesis that doctors using an insulin information checklist during simulated insulin initiation would impart more information regarding insulin use. Methods: A total of 128 simulations were conducted. Doctors (n = 64) were recruited from practitioners recently completing internship (n = 19) and those established in primary care (n = 45). Both groups of doctors were strata randomized to control (n = 32) and intervention groups (n = 32), so that each group contained equal numbers. Doctors in each group experienced two identical simulations of insulin initiation with an intervening period of 10 min. Doctors in the intervention arm were introduced to an insulin initiation checklist, which they reviewed independently and utilized in the second simulation. Trained assessors captured the provision of education in 21 predefined educational areas. Differences in the change of the total education provided between the first and second simulations were assessed using linear regression. Results: The difference in the mean change of education provided between the first and second simulations within the 21 educational areas for the control and treatment groups was 9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.8-11.1, P < 0.001] - an increase of 46.2%. The difference for the 15 areas relevant to pen use was 7.3 (95% CI: 6.2-8.4, P < 0.001) - an increase of 51.6%. Conclusions: The checklist resulted in doctors providing significantly more education applicable to syringe and insulin pen routes of insulin administration during simulations. Further research is needed on the checklist's impact on healthcare professionals and patient outcomes in the clinical context.

AB - Aim: The study tested the hypothesis that doctors using an insulin information checklist during simulated insulin initiation would impart more information regarding insulin use. Methods: A total of 128 simulations were conducted. Doctors (n = 64) were recruited from practitioners recently completing internship (n = 19) and those established in primary care (n = 45). Both groups of doctors were strata randomized to control (n = 32) and intervention groups (n = 32), so that each group contained equal numbers. Doctors in each group experienced two identical simulations of insulin initiation with an intervening period of 10 min. Doctors in the intervention arm were introduced to an insulin initiation checklist, which they reviewed independently and utilized in the second simulation. Trained assessors captured the provision of education in 21 predefined educational areas. Differences in the change of the total education provided between the first and second simulations were assessed using linear regression. Results: The difference in the mean change of education provided between the first and second simulations within the 21 educational areas for the control and treatment groups was 9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.8-11.1, P < 0.001] - an increase of 46.2%. The difference for the 15 areas relevant to pen use was 7.3 (95% CI: 6.2-8.4, P < 0.001) - an increase of 51.6%. Conclusions: The checklist resulted in doctors providing significantly more education applicable to syringe and insulin pen routes of insulin administration during simulations. Further research is needed on the checklist's impact on healthcare professionals and patient outcomes in the clinical context.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84952837881&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/dme.12956

DO - 10.1111/dme.12956

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 1204

EP - 1210

JO - Diabetic Medicine

JF - Diabetic Medicine

SN - 0742-3071

IS - 9

ER -