Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05986695

Informational Nudge to Improve Heart Failure Prescribing

This study addresses a critical gap of care for Veterans with heart failure (HF). Only 1/3 or fewer eligible Veterans are receiving recommended SGLT2 and MRA therapies that save lives and prevents HF hospitalizations. The investigators will compare the effect of clinician directed nudges as strategies to improve the health of Veterans with HF.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Southern Arizona VA Health Care System, Tucson, AZ

Tucson, Arizona, 85723-0001, United States

About this study

This study addresses a critical gap in quality of care for Veterans with heart failure (HF). Only 1/3 or fewer eligible Veterans are receiving SGLT2 inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, both medications that save lives and prevents HF hospitalizations. The investigators will combine insights from behavioral science and quality improvement science to create two types of 'nudges' - informational alerts and peer comparison feedback - to increase prescribing of these medications. The investigators will create two types of 'nudges' - informational alerts and peer comparison feedback - to increase prescribing of these medications. The investigators will compare the effect of these two nudge strategies alone and in combination compared to usual care. This project will develop simple, scalable, and low-cost strategies to improve the health of Veterans with HF.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Primary care and cardiology clinicians at Southern AZ VA Health Care System working in outpatient clinic setting

Exclusion criteria

  • Clinicians who are in training status (resident, fellow) will be excluded.

Treatment and study plan

Alert

Behavioral

Interruptive alert. The prototype alert is in the form of a chart note with evidence-based practice guidelines that will actively display in the clinician's list of daily alerts (like an inbox) that must be cleared daily. It is interruptive because can only be dismissed from the clinician's inbox list after signing the note

Peer comparison report

Behavioral

Clinicians will receive an email describing their recent SGLT2 and MRA prescribing performance relative to their peers.

Primary outcomes

  1. Effectiveness (MRA Prescriptions)

    Time frame: 30 days

    The primary effectiveness outcome is the amount of SGLT2 or MRA prescriptions in eligible HF patients in the three intervention groups compared with the control group within 30 days of appointment. Thirty days is a common time interval for HF outcomes assessment and allows for chart documentation, care coordination, laboratory testing, and medication prescribing that may occur days after a patient encounter. The investigators will record all SGLT2 or MRA prescriptions, including those from non-targeted clinicians, given that nudge interventions, especially the informational alert, may impact other clinicians directly (e.g., view alert in EHR) or indirectly (e.g., referral from targeted clinician). Data represent a cumulative number of prescriptions filled.

  2. Effectiveness (SGLT2 Prescriptions)

    Time frame: 30 days

    The primary effectiveness outcome is the amount of SGLT2 or MRA prescriptions in eligible HF patients in the three intervention groups compared with the control group within 30 days of appointment. Thirty days is a common time interval for HF outcomes assessment and allows for chart documentation, care coordination, laboratory testing, and medication prescribing that may occur days after a patient encounter. The investigators will record all SGLT2 or MRA prescriptions, including those from non-targeted clinicians, given that nudge interventions, especially the informational alert, may impact other clinicians directly (e.g., view alert in EHR) or indirectly (e.g., referral from targeted clinician). Data represent a cumulative number of prescriptions filled.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Reach-Clinician

    Time frame: 6 months

    Reach will be measured at the clinician level as the number of unique clinicians who received an informational alert or peer comparison report. The control group did not receive any alert.

  2. Incidence of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events

    Time frame: 30 days

    The investigators will measure safety as the number of patients who were deemed by the participant (clinician) to discontinued prescribed medicine due to suspected adverse effects within 30 days of the nudge interventions.

  3. Implementation-Acceptability

    Time frame: 6 months

    Implementation will be assessed by clinician-directed survey of Acceptability of intervention Measure. The REDCap survey was on the Likert Scale: minimum 1 and maximum 5. With 5 being the highest. Acceptability was determine by the number of participants who were neutral or positive with their responses according the the Likert Scale. The anonymous surveys were sent to all in the three groups and did not collect any identifying information.

  4. Reach-Patient

    Time frame: 6 months

    At the patient level, Reach will be measured as the number of unique patients for whom the participants received informational alerts

  5. Reach-Comparison of Strategies

    Time frame: 6 months

    The investigators will measure the proportion of alerts relative to the total number of eligible patients with HF; this denominator will allow for comparisons of representativeness of the alert strategy.

  6. Implementation-Appropriateness

    Time frame: 6 months

    Appropriateness will be assessed by clinician direct survey of Intervention Appropriateness Measure. Likert scale: minimum 1 and maximum 5. With 5 being the highest. The number of respondents who were neutral and positive were counted. The anonymous surveys were sent to all in the three groups and did not collect any identifying information.

  7. Implementation-Feasibility

    Time frame: 6 months

    Feasibility will be assessed by clinician direct survey of Feasibility of Intervention Measure. Likert scale: minimum 1 and maximum 5. With 5 being the highest. The survey participants responded used the Likert scale to determine if the intervention would be feasible. All responses neutral or positive were counted. The anonymous surveys were sent to all in the three groups and did not collect any identifying information.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

VA Office of Research and Development

Fed

Collaborators

  • Arizona State University

Registry information

Official study title

Preliminary Implementation of an Informational Nudge to Improve Heart Failure Prescribing

Acronym: Nudge

Important dates

Study start
2023
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Aug 14, 2023
Registry last updated
May 1, 2026

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.