Electronic versions

Documents

DOI

  • A.J. Noble
    University of Liverpool
  • D. Snape
    University of Liverpool
  • S. Nevitt
    University of Liverpool
  • Emily Holmes
  • M. Morgan
    King's College London
  • Catrin Tudur Smith
    University of Liverpool
  • Dyfrig Hughes
  • M. Buchanan
    Wirral University Teaching Hospital
  • J. McVicar
    NHS Highland
  • E. MacCallum
    Royal Liverpool University Hospital
  • Steve Goodacre
    University of Sheffield
  • L. Rinsdale
    King's College London
  • A.G. Marson
    University of Liverpool

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and optimal design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of Seizure First Aid Training For Epilepsy (SAFE).

DESIGN: Pilot RCT with embedded microcosting.

SETTING: Three English hospital emergency departments (EDs).

PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥16 with established epilepsy reporting ≥2 ED visits in the prior 12 months and their significant others (SOs).

INTERVENTIONS: Patients (and their SOs) were randomly allocated (1:1) to SAFE plus treatment-as-usual (TAU) or TAU alone. SAFE is a 4-hour group course.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two criteria evaluated a definitive RCT's feasibility: (1) ≥20% of eligible patients needed to be consented into the pilot trial; (2) routine data on use of ED over the 12 months postrandomisation needed securing for ≥75%. Other measures included eligibility, ease of obtaining routine data, availability of self-report ED data and comparability, SAFE's effect and intervention cost.

RESULTS: Of ED attendees with a suspected seizure, 424 (10.6%) patients were eligible; 53 (12.5%) patients and 38 SOs consented. Fifty-one patients (and 37 SOs) were randomised. Routine data on ED use at 12 months were secured for 94.1% patients. Self-report ED data were available for 66.7% patients. Patients reported more visits compared with routine data. Most (76.9%) patients randomised to SAFE received it and no related serious adverse events occurred. ED use at 12 months was lower in the SAFE+TAU arm compared with TAU alone, but not significantly (rate ratio=0.62, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.17). A definitive trial would need ~674 patient participants and ~39 recruitment sites. Obtaining routine data was challenging, taking ~8.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS: In satisfying only one predetermined 'stop/go' criterion, a definitive RCT is not feasible. The low consent rate in the pilot trial raises concerns about a definitive trial's finding's external validity and means it would be expensive to conduct. Research is required into how to optimise recruitment from the target population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13871327.

Keywords

  • Epilepsy, Accident & Emergency Medicine, Organisation of health services, Health economics, Clinical Trials
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere035516
JournalBMJ Open
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 16 Apr 2020

Total downloads

No data available
View graph of relations