Implementation of a nurse-led self-management support intervention for patients with cancer-related pain: a cluster randomized phase-IV study with a stepped wedge design (EvANtiPain)

Table 1 Participating hospitals and wards and recruitment (ITT [PP])

Hospital	Ward	Order^a	Main medical field	% oncology patients^b	size^c	N IG ITT (PP)^d	N CG ITT (PP)^e
H 1	W 9^f	8	Gynecology	40	25	0	3
H 1	W 10	3	Oncology/Internal medicine	70	21	3	1
H 1	W 11	14	Internal Medicine/Oncology	40	20	0	6
H 1	W 12	1	Pneumology	45	22	3	1
H 1	W 13	12	Pneumology	40	21	0	1
H 2	W 14	17	Internal Medicine/Oncology	60	27	0	5
H 2	W 15	9	Internal Medicine/Oncology	50	27	0	3
H 2	W 16	10	Internal Medicine/Oncology	50	27	0	5
H 2	W 17	2	Oncology/Hematology	98	13	4 (3)	2 (3)
H 3	W 1	15	Surgery	2^g	32	0	1
H 3	W 2	5	Surgery	70	23	9	4
H 3	W 3	16	Oncology	99	25	0	17
H 3	W 4	11	Gynecology	95	20	8 (6)	21 (23)
H 3	W 5	13	Ear nose and throat	30	24	1	3
H 3	W 6	6	Ear nose and throat	30	24	0	6
H 3	W 7	7	Radiotherapy	98	36	16 (11)	9 (14)
H 3	W 8	4	Radiotherapy	99	12	17 (9)	4 (12)

^aOrder of implementation, each step/sequence between implementations was ~ 24 days
^bThis assumed rate was assessed in an interview with head nurses prior to recruitment of each ward
^cNumber of beds
^dIG: intervention group, ITT: intention to treat approach - analyzing each patient after implementation of the intervention (PP: per protocol approach - analyzing each patient who received the intervention n in brackets)
^eCG: control group, ITT: intention to treat approach - analyzing each patient before implementation of the intervention (PP: per protocol approach - analyzing each patient who did not receive the intervention n in brackets)
^fAfter recruitment and randomization, an organizational change caused that this ward did not have many oncology patients any more. At inclusion, this ward would have had 50% oncology patients

ISSN: 1471-2407