Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05065502

MIDAS Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of Implementation Strategies to Optimize Use of Medications in VA Clinical Settings

Scientific advances are constantly leading to better treatments. However, it is quite challenging for healthcare systems, including VA, to ask very busy providers to change the way they practice. The MIDAS QUERI program will help providers improve the way they treat VA patients for three common conditions, using specific strategies to ensure the reliable delivery of these treatments. The first project will focus on reducing potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use using the VIONE practice, developed in VA. The second project will focus on better use of drugs called direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with a history of severe blood clots or an abnormal heart rhythm. The third project will focus on increasing the use of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia as the first-line treatment for insomnia instead of sleep medications. The investigators will test two implementation approaches to improve medication use within these topics.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI

Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105-2303, United States

About this study

Background The adoption and sustainment of evidence-based practices (EBPs) is a challenge within many healthcare systems, especially in settings that have already strived but failed to achieve longer-term goals. The Veterans Affairs (VA) Maintaining Implementation through Dynamic Adaptations (MIDAS) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) program was funded as a series of trials to test multi-component implementation strategies to sustain optimal use of three EBPs: 1) a deprescribing approach intended to reduce potentially inappropriate polypharmacy; 2) appropriate dosing and drug selection of direct-acting anticoagulant medications (DOACs); and 3) use of cognitive behavioral therapy as first-line treatment for insomnia before pharmacologic treatment. We describe the design and methods for a harmonized series of cluster-randomized control trials comparing two implementation strategies.

Methods For each trial, we will recruit 8-12 clinics (24-36 total). All will have access to a clinical dashboard that flags patients who may benefit from the target EBP at that clinic and provider. For each trial, clinics will be randomized to one of two implementation strategies to improve use of the EBPs: 1) individual-level academic detailing (AD); or 2) AD plus the team-based Learn. Engage. Act. Process. (LEAP) quality improvement (QI) learning program. The primary outcomes will be operationalized across the three trials as a patient-level dichotomous response (yes/no) indicating patients with potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) among those who may benefit from the EBP. This outcome will be computed using month-by-month administrative data. Primary comparison between the two implementation strategies will be analyzed using generalized estimating equations (GEE) with clinic-level monthly percent of PIMs as the dependent variable. Primary comparative endpoint will be at 13-18 months post-baseline. Each trial will also be analyzed independently.

Discussion MIDAS QUERI trials will focus on fostering sustained use of EBPs that previously had targeted but incomplete implementation. Our implementation approaches are designed to engage frontline clinicians in a dynamic optimization process that integrates use of actionable clinical dashboard data and making incremental changes, designed to be feasible within busy clinical settings.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

Note- the investigators are recruiting clinics - not individual patients.

  • Prior to implementation, the investigators will work with sites to ensure they have met the preconditions necessary to begin sustained optimization of the EBP:
  • a team leader or champion
  • an identified department with service leadership buy-in and control over the processes/practices impacted by the implementation
  • readily accessible data to measure process and impact of the implementation and use of the EBP
  • availability of required resources

Exclusion criteria

N/A

Treatment and study plan

Academic Detailing (AD)

Behavioral

The National Resource Center for Academic Detailing (NaRCAD) describes AD as "an innovative, one-on-one outreach education technique that helps clinicians provide evidence-based care to their patients. Using an accurate, up-to-date synthesis of the best clinical evidence in an engaging format, academic detailers ignite clinician behavior change, ultimately improving patient health. A successful AD visit is highly interactive, always a dialogue, and assesses a clinician's individual needs, beliefs, attitudes, issues, and concerns in order to promote better.[practice]."

LEAP

Behavioral

Learn. Engage. Act. Process (LEAP) program is a structured 6-month core curriculum plus 6 monthly collaborative sessions. The LEAP quality improvement program engages frontline teams in sustained incremental improvements of EBPs over a six-month period, allowing space for busy clinicians to learn and immediately apply fundamental QI skills. LEAP encompasses: 1) a structured, accessible curriculum based on the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's (IHI) Model for Improvement and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles of change; 2) team-based, hands-on learning, and 3) coaching support and a QI network to enhance learning and accountability.

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in the Percentage of Patients With Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use (PIMs) Between Pre- and Post-periods, Across Facilities.

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Percentage of PIMs across AD vs. LEAP+AD facilities were modelled as the difference between post-period and pre-period, using the average from the 1-6-month pre-baseline period as "pre" and the average 13-18-month post-baseline as "post." Data was collected monthly at patient level and collapsed by clinic-month for patients who are at risk of potentially inappropriate medication use. Clinic-month outcome was computed as: 1) VIONE; proportion of patients who possessed one or more medications from the Beers' list of patients 65 or older, actively following with the clinic, and not in hospice/palliative care; 2) DOACs; proportion of patients with flags for potentially inappropriate use on a DOAC safety dashboard of those using DOACs; 3) CBTI; proportion of patients with a new prescription for a sleep medication for insomnia who have not had CBTI of those who are actively followed by the clinic and not in hospice/palliative care. The outcome was analyzed by pooling across all three-EBPs.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Patients With Percentage of Potentially Inappropriate Use of Medications (PIMs) Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Medications include proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), aspirin, central nervous system (CNS) active medications (muscle relaxants, anti-psychotics, Z-drugs, and benzodiazepines), or anticholinergic drugs. This is the primary outcome for the VIONE trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial and the VIONE sub-analysis of the overall MIDAS study primary outcome. Percentage of patients with PIMs across AD vs. LEAP+AD facilities were modelled longitudinally using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE), with a three way-interaction of arm, month of follow-up, and pre-, post-period. Data will was be collected monthly at patient level and collapsed by clinic-month for patients who are at risk of potentially inappropriate medication use. Estimates computed using least squares (LS) means from the GEE model.

  2. Change in Monthly Medication Costs for All Drugs Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Cost of all drugs without regard to appropriateness. Average monthly cost per patient across LEAP vs. LEAP + AD facilities were modelled longitudinally with a Generalized Linear Model with a Gamma Link and a three-way interaction of arm, month of follow-up and pre-, post-period. Estimates computed using LS means from the GEE model. This will be a secondary outcome for the VIONE trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  3. Change in Number of Medication Reviews Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Number of medication reviews completed by a pharmacist. This will be a secondary outcome for the VIONE trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  4. Change in Number of Inappropriate Medications at a Patient-level

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    This is a measure of count of medications used at the patient (not facility) level. This will be a secondary outcome for the VIONE trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  5. Change in Percentage of Patients With High-risk Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) Use Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    High-risk DOAC use will be assessed by "flags" using the algorithm from an operations DOAC dashboard. These flags were developed based on existing guidelines and advice of many anticoagulation experts. Percentage of patients with PIMs across AD vs. LEAP+AD facilities were modelled longitudinally using Generalized Estimating Equations, with a three way-interaction of arm, month of follow-up, and pre-, post-period. Data will was be collected monthly at patient level and collapsed by clinic-month for patients who are at risk of potentially inappropriate medication use. Estimates computed using LS means from the GEE model. This is the primary outcome for the DOAC trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial and the DOAC sub-analysis of the overall MIDAS study primary outcome.

  6. Change in Percentage of Patients With Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) Flags Attributable to Chronic Kidney Disease Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    This was the subset of patients with DOAC Population Health Management Tool (Dashboard) flags that occur when medications are given at doses that would be appropriate but are not because the patient has abnormal renal function. This has had minimal adjustments since being described in previous publications.

  7. Change in Percentage of Patients With Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) Flags Attributable to Weight Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    This was the subset of patients with DOAC Population Health Management Tool (Dashboard) flags that occur when medications are given at doses that would be appropriate but are not because the patient has unusually high or low weight or BMI. This has had minimal adjustments since being described in previous publications.

  8. Change in Percentage of Patients With Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) Flags Attributable to Other Mis-dosing Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    These are the remaining high-risk flags and are usually due to patients with medication interactions or doses that are incorrect due to the indication. This has had minimal adjustments since being described in previous publications.

  9. Change in Percentage of Patient Receipt of Any Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBTI) Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Patient receipt of any CBTI will be measured by extracting from the medical records CBTI note templates completed by CBTI therapists. The denominator will consist of primary care patients who are not in hospice/palliative care. Percentage of PIMs across AD vs. LEAP+AD facilities were modelled longitudinally using Generalized Estimating Equations, with a three way-interaction of arm, month of follow-up, and pre-, post-period. Data will was be collected monthly at patient level and collapsed by clinic-month for patients who are at risk of potentially inappropriate medication use. Estimates computed using LS means from the GEE model. This will be the primary outcome for the CBTI trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  10. Change in Mean Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBTI) Sessions Completed

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    Mean number of sessions will be measured by extracting from the medical records CBTI note templates completed by CBTI therapists. The denominator will consist of primary care patients who are not in hospice/palliative care. This will be a secondary outcome for the CBTI trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  11. Change in the Monthly Percentage of Patients Referred to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBTI) Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    CBTI referrals will be measured according to counts of CBTI consult requests in the medical record. For clinics that do not use medical record consult requests specific to CBTI, referrals will be measured using monthly counts provided by CBTI therapists. The denominator will consist of primary care patients who are not in hospice/palliative care. This will be a secondary outcome for the CBTI trial when analyzed as a stand-alone trial.

  12. Change in Percentage of Patients With First Line Sleep Medication Across Facilities

    Time frame: 13-18 months post-baseline

    The proportion of patients with a new prescription for a sleep medication for insomnia who have not had CBTI of those who are actively followed by the clinic and not in hospice/palliative care. This is a CBTI sub-analysis of the overall MIDAS study primary outcome.

Other outcomes

  1. Change in Employee Engagement in Quality Improvement

    Time frame: 18-months Post-baseline

    3-item pilot measure of the extent to which employees engage in quality improvement activities given both at baseline and 18-months post-implementation. Scores are 1-5 with higher ratings indicating more engagement in quality improvement.

  2. Change in Employee Burnout

    Time frame: 18-months post-baseline

    3-item measure comprising one item each for exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced achievement (reverse scored) given both at baseline and 18-months post-implementation. "High Burnout" measures the percent of staff who are feeling burned out on all three burnout items at a frequency of "once a week" to "every day." Scored: 0-100%, where LOWER score is more favorable.

  3. Change in Best Places to Work Score

    Time frame: 18-months post-baseline

    3-item scale. "Best Places to Work" (BPTW) is a summary measure of the group's satisfaction with the job, organization, and likelihood to recommend VA as a good place to work given both at baseline and 18-months post-implementation. The values are 1 to 5 with a higher score being more positive and the BPTW score is the average of the 3 questions. This is a measure normally administered within the All-employee Survey (AES) and the questions come from the Partnership for Public Service's BPTW survey (http://bestplacestowork.org).

  4. Change in Workgroup Cohesion & Engagement

    Time frame: 18-months post-baseline

    7-item measure from the VA's newly developed Patient Safety Culture given both at baseline and 18-months post-implementation. Values 1 to 5 where higher values indicate more positive scores.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

VA Office of Research and Development

Fed

Registry information

Official study title

Maintaining Implementation Through Dynamic Adaptations (MIDAS) (QUE 20-025)

Acronym: MIDAS cRCT

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Oct 4, 2021
Registry last updated
Oct 15, 2025

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.