nihr grant programme rp-pg-0707-10012 executive team meeting 28 september 2010 glanville centre,...
TRANSCRIPT
NIHR Grant NIHR Grant ProgrammeProgramme
RP-PG-0707-10012 RP-PG-0707-10012
Executive Team Meeting Executive Team Meeting
28 September 2010 28 September 2010
Glanville Centre, Salisbury Glanville Centre, Salisbury District Hospital District Hospital
Agenda Agenda 9.00 – 9.109.00 – 9.10 CoffeeCoffee
9.10 – 9.309.10 – 9.30 Intro and 18/12 reportIntro and 18/12 report Ian SwainIan Swain
9.30 – 9.30 – 10.1510.15
WP1 progress to dateWP1 progress to date Damian Damian Jenkinson/Gabrielle Mc Jenkinson/Gabrielle Mc HughHugh
10.15 – 10.15 – 11.0011.00
WP2 progress to dateWP2 progress to date Anand Pandyan/Sybil Anand Pandyan/Sybil FarmerFarmer
11.00 – 11.00 – 11.3011.30
CoffeeCoffee
11.30 – 11.30 – 12.3012.30
WP3 progress to dateWP3 progress to date Jane Burridge, Ann-Jane Burridge, Ann-Marie Hughes, Sara Marie Hughes, Sara DemainDemain
12.30 – 12.30 – 13.3013.30
LunchLunch
13.30 – 13.30 – 15.0015.00
Preparation for CT Preparation for CT applicationapplication-Due on 1/3/11Due on 1/3/11-Dates for WP Dates for WP informationinformation
All All
15.00 – 15.00 – 15.3015.30
TeaTea
15.30 – 15.30 – 17.00 17.00
CT application CT application continuedcontinued
AllAll
17.0017.00 DONMDONM
NIHR PROGRAMME GRANT v3 09 10 11
Version 2 if trial not funded
Start date 1/1/09 (Q1) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Task
WP1 - Review of existing services
Identification of centres
Qualitative design phase workshop
Drafting of questionnaire
Piloting of questionnaire
Analysis of pilot results
Modification of questionnaire
Main questionnaire and follow up
Analysis of results
Producing review for publication
Updating existing services review
Reports 20/11/
09 20/11/
1001/03/
11 20/11/
10
WP2 - Literature review09Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
10Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
11Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Planning the review
Conducting the searches
Selection of articles
Review process
Peer review by management team
Audit of article selection
Audit of reviewed articles
Updating of reviews
Publication of systematic reviews
Reports 20/11/2009
20/11/2010
01/03/2011
20/11/2010
WP3 - Acceptability of ATs09Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
10Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
11Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Ethical application and approval
Design, running and evaluating the interactive exhibition
Focus groups
Focus group analysis
Questionnaire design
Questionnaire validation
Questionnaire data collection
Questionnaire analysis
Field trials design
Dissemination
Reports 20/11/2009
20/11/2010
01/03/2011
20/11/2010
WP4 - Clinical Trials09Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
10Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
11Q1 Q2 Q3
Q4/Q1 2012
WP4 Phase 1
AT selection procedure and consultation
Decision on what ATs to include in Phase 2
Trial design
WP4 Phase 2
JDs and advert for therapists
WP6 - Dissemination
Annual/Financial Report 01/03/2010
01/09/2010
01/03/2011
01/03/2012
Trial design report (major report) 15/03/2
011
Presenting at key meetings
Writing final report
Publishing book/special edition
International conference
AHP processAHP process
• Seminars and workshops given by Maarten Seminars and workshops given by Maarten IjzermanIjzerman
• Its been used in Healthcare for the last 10 yearsIts been used in Healthcare for the last 10 years• Combines clinical experience with systematic Combines clinical experience with systematic
reviews.reviews.• Define attributes, both primary and secondary Define attributes, both primary and secondary
and assign attribute weights to themand assign attribute weights to them• Identify alternative treatmentsIdentify alternative treatments• Undertake comparisons in order to get Undertake comparisons in order to get
performance weights.performance weights.• Done using Expert choice softwareDone using Expert choice software
AttributesAttributesDetermined by Exec team in March and Determined by Exec team in March and
confirmed with Steering Committeeconfirmed with Steering Committee• FunctionFunction• ComfortComfort• RisksRisks
– Short termShort term– Long termLong term
• Daily effort (patient)Daily effort (patient)– Time Time – ComplexityComplexity
• Impact on Health ServiceImpact on Health Service– TimeTime– ComplexityComplexity
Alternative TreatmentsAlternative Treatments
• Peripheral FESPeripheral FES• Central/cortical stimulationCentral/cortical stimulation• CIMTCIMT• RoboticsRobotics• Active orthoticsActive orthotics• BiofeedbackBiofeedback• VR including WiiVR including Wii
Pair wise comparisonsPair wise comparisonsUndertaken by Steering Committee as Undertaken by Steering Committee as
expert groupexpert group• In order to get performance weightsIn order to get performance weights• E.g. how would you rate FES and CIMT E.g. how would you rate FES and CIMT
in terms of comfort.in terms of comfort.• Replace performance weights with Replace performance weights with
objective data from WP2objective data from WP2• In absence of objective data use expert In absence of objective data use expert
opinion from Steering Committeeopinion from Steering Committee• Use subjects from WP3 to give patient Use subjects from WP3 to give patient
perspective to attribute weightsperspective to attribute weights
Combining dataCombining data
• Use results of AHP process, Use results of AHP process, professionals and patientsprofessionals and patients
• Use HE informationUse HE information• Use WP1 to look at prevalence of Use WP1 to look at prevalence of
impairmentsimpairments• Come to final conclusion - re two Come to final conclusion - re two
selected interventions and use selected interventions and use WP1 to determine control group.WP1 to determine control group.
www.atrasprojewww.atrasproject.orgct.org