University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, 35294, United States
NCT Number: NCT03735238
The study will attempt to put into practice a shared decision making (SDM) strategy, using an individualized, computerized decision- aid (DA) for Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Observational
Birmingham, Alabama, 35294, United States
The proposed study will evaluate methods to implement a shared decision making strategy, using an individualized, computerized decision- aid (DA). The investigators will test the effectiveness of this implementation with 3 strategies in 15 clinics. Formative evaluation strategies will be used to assess needs at each clinic, with key clinic informants participating in semi-structured interviews. The study will enroll patient participants across all 16 sites, who will review the decision aid and be asked a feasibility and acceptability assessment. At the conclusion of the study, key clinic informants, as well as selected patient participants will participate in semi-structured interviews to assess the effectiveness in implementing the DA in the clinic setting.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Patient Inclusion Criteria:
Patient Exclusion Criteria:
SMILE is a computerized decision-aid designed to give lupus patients information about lupus, treatments for lupus available to them, as well as side effects. This will be administered at every lupus clinic session. Every patient will see the SMILE Computerized Decision-Aid at their index baseline clinic visit.
Other names: SMILE, Decision-Aid, DA
Time frame: 24 months
Reach/penetration was measured by calculating a ratio of patients who were enrolled in the implementation project (# of patients who viewed the SLE PtDA) divided by the number of Eligible Participants at Each Clinical Site identified using the electronic medical record (EMR) in the respective clinic (# of eligible patients). The number of eligible patients was based on the average number of patients with a diagnosis of lupus seen in each clinic over the study period (2019-2023).
Time frame: 24 months
Clinic personnel's perception of the acceptability of the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA), measured using a validated scale with four (4) items with responses ranging from 1 ("completely disagree") to 5 ("completely agree"). The four items will be averaged to create one composite mean scale score (range 1-5), where higher scores reflect perceptions of greater acceptability (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 24 months
Clinic personnel's perception of the implementation success of the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA), measured using a validated scale with three (3) items with responses ranging from 1 ("Disagree") to 5 ("Agree"). These three items will be averaged to create one composite mean scale score (range 1-5), where higher scores reflect perceptions of greater implementation success (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 24 months
Clinic personnel's perception of the permanence of the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA), measured using one validated item that is scored ranging from 1 ("Not at all permanent") to 5 ("Extremely permanent"). This item will be examined by itself, where higher scores indicate perceptions of greater permanence of the decision-aid in the clinic (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 24 Months
Clinic personnel's perception of the appropriateness of the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA), measured using a validated scale with four (4) items with responses ranging from 1 ("completely disagree") to 5 ("completely agree"). The four items will be averaged to create one composite mean scale score (range 1-5), where higher scores reflect perceptions of greater appropriateness (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 24 Months
Clinic personnel's perception of the feasibility of the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA), measured using a validated scale with four (4) items with responses ranging from 1 ("completely disagree") to 5 ("completely agree"). The four items will be averaged to create one composite mean scale score (range 1-5), where higher scores reflect perceptions of greater feasibility (i.e., better outcome).
Time frame: 6 Months
Decisional conflict was measured using the low literacy version of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), a well-validated self-administered instrument, after viewing the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA). The low literacy version has 10 items with 3 response categories: yes, unsure, and no. Four subscale scores consisting of uncertainty about choice, feeling informed, values clarity, and feeling supported in decision-making were also calculated. DCS (and subscale) scores range from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) and scores >= 25 are consistent with clinically significant residual decisional conflict
Time frame: 6 Months
The Interpersonal Processes of Care short form (IPC-SF) is a patient-reported, 18-item validated patient-reported patient-physician communication and care processes measure, assessed after viewing the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA). Scores range from 18 to 90, with higher scores indicating better patient-physician communication ± care.
Time frame: 6 months
Patient satisfaction with the ease of the use of the SLE Patient Decision-aid (PtDA) measured using a validated single item scale scored on an ordinal scale from (strongly disagree =1) to (strongly agree = 5). This item will be examined by itself, where higher scores indicate greater patient satisfaction with the decision aid (i.e., better outcome). This is a single item scale, and there are no subscales. It was adapted from another study that assessed satisfaction with iPad or interactive voice response.
Time frame: 6 Months
The SLE Patient Decision-aid (PtDA) review times was expressed in minutes as patient-reported; this was supplemented by study coordinator's record of patient DA review time in-clinic prior to addition of this question. This patient self-reported question was added at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, where shelter-in-place orders led to stopping of in-person outpatient visits and all vists were converted to virtual visits using the phone or the video (Telemedicine).
Time frame: Baseline visit after viewing the SLE Patient Decision-Aid (PtDA)
Patient perception of the effect of the decision-aid on preparing the patient for decision making measured using the Patient Preparation for Decision Making (PDM) , a validated scale consisting of 10 questions scored on an ordinal scale from (not at all =1) to (a great deal = 5. Score ranged 0-100, 100 representing the highest preparation for decision-making. This was assessed after viewing the SLE Patient decision-aid (PtDA).
Time frame: Baseline visit after viewing the SLE PtDA
The patient acceptability survey is for the assessment of patient acceptability of the SLE Patient Decision-Aid (PtDA). Each question was rated from Poor (1) to Excellent (4). Total score ranged 1-4. DA acceptability refers to rating regarding the comprehensibility of component of the decision-aid, its length, pace, amount of the information, and the balance in presentation of the information about the options available and the overall suitability for decision making.
Time frame: Baseline visit after viewing the SLE PtDA
The feasibility of the study survey completion and the administration of the lupus decision aid in the busy clinic were assessed with a self-administered patient questionnaire consisting of 4 questions, 2 questions for each, the survey and for the process of viewing ± administering the lupus DA in the busy clinic. Responses ranged from strongly disagree (=1) to strongly agree (=5). Higher scores indicate higher feasibility of the survey and of the SLE Patient Decision-Aid (PtDA) administration respectively.
Time frame: Baseline visit after viewing the SLE PtDA
Patient perception of the SLE Patient Decision-Aid (PtDA) usefulness was aimed at assessing whether people would consider the the SLE PtDA to be useful at present and when they would think back to the time, they had made decisions about lupus treatments in the past (question 1), and whether the information contained in the lupus DA were adequate (question 2). It measured patient response of Yes vs. no to two simple questions. The tool is not yet a validated assessment but was based on our debriefing of lupus patients in the previous randomized study of lupus decision-aid.
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Other
Acronym: IDEAL
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03938324
Anemia, Anemia, Hemolytic
Durham, North Carolina, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT00055055
Arthritis, Arthritis, Rheumatoid
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT03738826
Autoimmune Diseases, Behavior
Durham, North Carolina, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06759519
Autoimmune Diseases, Connective Tissue Diseases
Barnaul, Russia
View Trial Details