Peer Mentoring [PM]
OtherVirtual Peer Mentoring
NCT Number: NCT03593395
This multi-center study will compare the effectiveness of adding virtual peer mentoring (PM) to a structured education-based (STE) transition program for emerging adults with sickle cell disease to determine its effect on decreasing the number of acute care visits per year, improving patient-reported outcomes, and reducing healthcare utilization among emerging adults with sickle cell disease (EA-SCD)
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me16 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, United States
This is a multi-center, cluster randomized study comparing the effectiveness of adding virtual peer mentoring (PM) to a structured education-based (STE) transition program based on the 6 core elements of transition in improving acute care reliance, quality of life and satisfaction with transition process in emerging adults with sickle cell disease (EA-SCD). The study will involve a total of 14 large (>80 EA-SCD currently in pediatric care) and small-scale (≤80 EA-SCD currently in pediatric care) clinical sites, with a 1:1 randomization at the site level. The study will involve approximately 700 subjects, 120 peer mentors, and 25 advisors. The primary endpoint of this study will be the average number of acute care visits per year over a minimum of 24 months. Secondary objectives are to compare the effectiveness of STE+PM versus STE alone at improving patient-reported outcomes and reducing healthcare utilization among EA-SCD. Enrollment is anticipated to occur over 18-24 months
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
EA-SCD Eligibility Criteria:
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Mentor Eligibility Criteria:
Advisor Eligibility Criteria:
Virtual Peer Mentoring
Education-based program
Time frame: Duration of time on study, on average 23 months
Acute care visits was calculated for each patient as the number of acute care visits over the duration of follow-up (time from enrollment to discontinuation of study participation). Acute visits were identified by manual chart reviews and included hospital admissions, ED, urgent care, day hospital, or infusion center visits. Acute care visits were calculated as the total number of acute care visits reported on study over the years the subject was on study.
Time frame: 6 and 12 months post-enrollment.
Specific item from ASQC-ME QOC. The survey measures patients' self-reported levels of quality of care received. This item was scored on a 10-point scale categorized to three ranges (0-6, 7-8, and 9-10). A "0" value is least, and a "10" value is best. 0-6 indicate the worst care, 7-8 indicate average care, 9-10 indicate the best care. Higher score indicates higher quality of care.
Time frame: At 6 and 12 months post-enrollment
Overall patient's perception of their quality of life. Higher quality of life score is better. There are 43 items with 9 dimensions: Pain and Hurt, Pain Impact, Pain Management, Worry I, Worry II, Emotions, Treatment, Communication I, Communication II. Individual questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale, (0=never, 4=almost always) and scores are transformed on a scale from 0-100, where 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. If more than 50% of the items are missing, the scale scores should not be computed. If 50% or more items are completed, the mean of the completed items is imputed for the total score.
Time frame: At 6 and 12 months post-enrollment.
Patient's perceived social support score. A higher score for an individual scale or for the overall support index indicates more support. MOS-SSS includes 19 items, with four separate social support subscales and an overall functional social support index. Each item is a 5-level Likert scale (1=None of the time, 5=All of the time). For each of the 4 subscales, respondent-specific mean scores are calculated, ignoring items with missing values. If at least one valid response is is available on a subscale, a score can be received for that subscale. To calculate overall total, take average of item scores for completed items and transform to 0-100 scale (100 is best possible outcome).
Time frame: At 6 and 12 months post-enrollment.
Patient's readiness to transition scale. A lower score indicates higher readiness. TIP-RFT includes 22 items, with 4 subscales: (1) Independent Living Skills (8 items, range 0-32), (2) Healthcare Knowledge and Skills scale (6 items, range 0-24), (3) Education and Vocational Planning scale (4 items, range 0-16), (4) Social Support Skill set (4 items, range 0-16). For total TIP-RFT, use sum of scales. Total score range (0-88), smaller score is better. If any items were missing, the scores were not computed.
Time frame: 12 months post-enrollment.
Specific item from the Health Care Transition Feedback Survey, created by Got Transition. The survey evaluated patients' experience with changing from a pediatric to an adult approach to care. This question evaluated how often the health care provider explained things in a way that was easy to understand. Answer categories for this item were Always, Usually, Sometimes, and Never.
Time frame: 12 months post-enrollment.
Specific item from the Health Care Transition Feedback Survey, created by Got Transition. The survey evaluated patients' experience with changing from a pediatric to an adult approach to care. This question evaluated how often the the patient scheduled their own appointments with their health care provider. Answer categories for this item were Always, Usually, Sometimes, and Never.
Time frame: 12 months post-enrollment.
Specific item from the Health Care Transition Feedback Survey, created by Got Transition. The survey evaluated patients' experience with changing from a pediatric to an adult approach to care. This question evaluated if the health care provider updated and shared a medical summary with the patient. Answer categories for this item were Yes or No.
Time frame: Duration of time on study up, on average 23 months
Ambulatory visits was calculated for each patient as the average number of ambulatory visits per year. Ambulatory visits were identified by manual chart reviews and included primary care visits, visits with the hematology/SCD provider, and other outpatient specialty visits. Ambulatory visits per year was calculated as the total number of ambulatory visits reported over the duration of time on study (from enrollment to discontinuation of study participation).
Time frame: Adult duration of time on study, on average 16.5 months
Adult provider visits was calculated for each patient as the average number of ambulatory visits that occurred with adult providers. These visits were identified by manual chart reviews. Adult provider visits per year was calculated as the total number of adult provider visits reported on study over the time from first visit with adult provider to end of study participation.
Time frame: Duration of time on study, on average 23 months
Hospitalization days was calculated for each patient as the average number of days spent inpatient for hospitalization per year. Inpatient dates were identified by manual chart reviews. Hospitalization days per year was calculated as the total number of hospitalization days reported on study over the total duration on study (from enrollment to discontinuation of study participation).
Time frame: Duration of time on study, on average 23 months.
14-day readmissions was calculated for each patient as the number of hospital admissions that occur within 14 days after discharge from a previous admission, per year. Hospital admissions were identified by manual chart reviews and total number of readmissions within 14 days were counted over the duration of time on study.
Time frame: Duration of time on study, on average 23 months
30-day readmissions will be calculated for each patient as the number of hospital admissions that occur within 30 days after discharge from a previous admission, per year. Hospital admissions were identified by manual chart reviews and total number of readmissions within 30 days were counted over the duration of time on study.
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Other
LCI-HEM-SCD-ST3P-UP-001: A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Peer Mentoring [PM] Versus Structured Transition Education Based Intervention [STE] for the Management of Care Transitions in Emerging Adults With Sickle Cell Disease (SCD)
Acronym: ST3P-UP
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.
NCT04691323
Anemia, Anemia, Hemolytic
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04688411
Anemia, Anemia, Hemolytic
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05405114
Anemia, Anemia, Hemolytic
Mobile, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07721155
Anemia, Anemia, Hemolytic
Amsterdam, Netherlands
View Trial Details