Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Enrolling by Invitation

NCT Number: NCT05390411

Seeking Objectivity in Allocation of Advanced Heart Failure (SOCIAL HF) Therapies Trial

The primary goal of this study is to assess real-world effectiveness and implementation of an evidence-based multi-component strategy to reduce disparities in the allocation rate of advanced heart failure therapies, heart transplants and ventricular assist devices. This study proposes to implement evidence-based strategies that reduce unequal and unethical decision-making towards patients, replace subjective evaluations with objective criteria, and improve group dynamics in a randomized cluster trial. Our rigorously designed trial will inform national guidelines for advanced heart failure therapy allocation, and data are likely to be generalizable to other organ replacement treatments and advanced chronic disease decision-making processes across populations.

Enrolling by Invitation

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Indiana University

Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202, United States

About this study

Standardized protocols can reduce the impact of unfair and unequal treatment but are underused. Since the Institute of Medicine's report, "Unequal Treatment", multiple studies have confirmed that standardization of decision-making processes reduces unequal treatment, but unequal and unethical perceptions in decision-making in the allocation of advanced therapies has not been addressed. Using an evidence-based framework for behavior change [Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation for Behavior Change/Behavior Change Wheel (COM-B/BCW)], we developed a standardized protocol strategy, Seeking Objectivity in Allocation of Advanced Heart Failure (SOCIAL HF), that addresses the most significant barriers to equality in advanced therapies: 1) unequal and unethical perceptions that influence decision-making, 2) subjectivity in evaluation of social support and adherence, and 3) poor group dynamics. Thus, SOCIAL HF includes: 1) evidence-based training to reduce disparities tailored for HF, 2) restriction to objective evaluations of social support and adherence, and 3) environmental restructuring and modeling of meeting settings to include anonymous electronic voting and more fair-minded seating arrangement. In complex decision-making that includes individuals and groups, our standardized protocol strategy, SOCIAL HF, has the greatest likelihood of reducing health disparities in advanced HF. Our goal is to assess real-world effectiveness (Aim 1) and implementation (Aim 2) of SOCIAL HF for allocation of advanced HF therapies, heart transplant and ventricular assist device implantation. As a type 2 effectiveness-implementation hybrid study, we will use a cluster randomized design to test the effectiveness of SOCIAL HF strategy. We will evaluate implementation of SOCIAL HF across study sites using mixed-methods to learn optimal implementation strategies to reduce disparities in accessing life-saving therapies. We will use normalization process theory to evaluate how SOCIAL HF affects processes and outcomes important to advanced HF centers (e.g. fidelity/variation). We will use RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) to evaluate factors that promote reach and adoption and resources needed for implementation. We have the relationships, infrastructure, and expertise to execute this project; our multidisciplinary team includes experts in HF, evidence-based training in reducing unequal and unethical perceptions in decision-making, clinical trials, mixed-methods, and implementation science.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Active United Network for Organ Sharing heart transplant and ventricular assist device center
  • Centers that routinely evaluate at least 50 minoritized racial/ethnic patients and 50 women for advanced heart failure therapies (heart transplant and ventricular assist device) over 2 years
  • Advanced therapy professionals from participating centers (i.e., coordinators, physicians, pharmacists, nurses, social workers)
  • Participants for the interview portion will be a subset of otherwise eligible advanced therapy professionals who are included on selection meeting attendance sheets at an included center

Exclusion criteria

  • Centers unable to fully participate in the training and evaluation measures
  • If the center ceases to be an active heart failure/transplant center

Treatment and study plan

SOCIAL HF

Behavioral

participate in SOCIAL HF training

Primary outcomes

  1. Proportion of evaluated minoritized racial/ethnic patients and women patients receiving advanced therapies.

    Time frame: Up to 2 years

  2. Change in SOCIAL HF fidelity from time of training completion (month 2) to time study target has been reached (up to 2 years) and 6 months after reaching study target (up to 2.5 years)

    Time frame: Month 2, up to 2 years, and up to 2.5 years

    Evaluated as barriers, facilitators, and variability in adoption, reach, implementation and maintenance through structured interviews.

    Study target is defined as time 50 patients of color and 50 women have been evaluated for advanced heart failure therapies per center.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change from baseline knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behavior change among clinicians at 2 months and time at which study target has been reached (up to 2 years)

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 months, and up to 2 years

    Multiple survey responses by participants will indicate knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behavior changes over time.

    Study target is defined as time 50 patients of color and 50 women have been evaluated for advanced heart failure therapies.

  2. Discussion themes during allocation meetings across patient race/ethnicity and sex

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 months, and up to 2 years

    Transcriptions of meetings will be qualitatively evaluated over time.

  3. Change from baseline sum group function scores at 2 months and time at which study target has been reached (up to 2 years)

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 months, and up to 2 years

    The de Groot Critically Reflective Diagnoses protocol objectively measures categories associated with group function including challenging groupthink, critical opinion sharing, research utilization, openness to mistakes, asking and giving feedback, and experimentation. Each category is scaled from 1-4 (high-low), 1 = demonstrating interaction and reflection, 2 = reflective on an individual basis, 3 = non-reflective and non-interactive, and 4 = restricted.

    Study target is defined as time 50 patients of color and 50 women have been evaluated for advanced heart failure therapies per center.

  4. Adoption of SOCIAL HF

    Time frame: 2 months

    Proportion of eligible advanced therapy professionals who participate in training

  5. Reach of SOCIAL HF

    Time frame: From 2 months up to 2 years

    Proportion of patients evaluated using any parts of SOCIAL HF

  6. Implementation of SOCIAL HF

    Time frame: From 2 months up to 2 years

    Proportion of patients evaluated using all parts of SOCIAL HF

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Indiana University

Other

Collaborators

  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)

Registry information

Acronym: SOCIAL HF

Important dates

Study start
2023
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2027
First posted
May 25, 2022
Registry last updated
Nov 18, 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.