A general method for calculating power for GEE analysis of complete and incomplete stepped wedge cluster randomized trials

Stepped wedge designs have uni-directional crossovers at randomly assigned time points (steps) where clusters switch from control to intervention condition. Incomplete stepped wedge designs are increasingly used in cluster randomized trials of health care interventions and have periods without data collection due to logistical, resource and patient-centered considerations. The development of sample size formulae for stepped wedge trials has primarily focused on complete designs and continuous responses. Addressing this gap, a general, fast, non-simulation based power procedure is proposed for generalized estimating equations analysis of complete and incomplete stepped wedge designs and its predicted power is compared to simulated power for binary and continuous responses. An extensive set of simulations for six and twelve clusters is based upon the Connect-Home trial with an incomplete stepped wedge design. Results show that empirical test size is well controlled using a t-test with bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator for as few as six clusters. Analytical power agrees well with a simulated power in scenarios with twelve clusters. For six clusters, analytical power is similar to simulated power with estimation using the correctly specified model-based variance estimator. To explore the impact of study design choice on power, the proposed fast GEE power method is applied to the Connect-Home trial design, four alternative incomplete stepped wedge designs and one complete design.

How many times should a cluster randomized crossover trial cross over?

Trial planning requires making efficient yet practical design choices. In a cluster randomized crossover trial, clusters of subjects cross back and forth between implementing the control and intervention conditions over the course of the trial, with each crossover marking the start of a new period. If it is possible to set up such a trial with more crossovers, a pertinent question is whether there are efficiency gains from clusters crossing over more frequently, and if these gains are substantial enough to justify the added complexity and cost of implementing more crossovers. We seek to determine the optimal number of crossovers for a fixed trial duration, and then identify other highly efficient designs by allowing the total number of clusters to vary and imposing thresholds on maximum cost and minimum statistical power. Our results pertain to trials with continuous recruitment and a continuous primary outcome, with the treatment effect estimated using a linear mixed model. To account for the similarity between subjects' outcomes within a cluster, we assume a correlation structure in which the correlation decays gradually in a continuous manner as the time between subjects' measurements increases. The optimal design is characterized by crossovers between the control and intervention conditions with each successive subject. However, this design is neither practical nor cost-efficient to implement, nor is it necessary: the gains in efficiency increase sharply in moving from a two-period to a four-period trial design, but approach an asymptote for the scenarios considered as the number of crossovers continues to increase.