Systolic Heart FailureNCT02026102
A Pilot Trial of Patient Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (ICDs)
A study testing ICD Decision Aid Toolkit in people with Systolic Heart Failure and Sudden Cardiac Death, run by University of Colorado, Denver at 3 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability and feasibility of a "toolkit" of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for heart failure patients who are considering an ICD implant. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Systolic Heart Failure, Sudden Cardiac Death
- What is being tested?
- ICD Decision Aid Toolkit
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 15 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2014to Nov 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- systolic heart failure (defined as an ejection fraction less than 35%)
- have been referred for a primary prevention ICD
- Note: Patients referred for an ICD with cardiac resynchronization therapy are NOT excluded.
Who cannot join
- Already have an ICD
- Non-English speaking (as the tools we have developed are only available in English currently)
- Other ICD indications (e.g. secondary prevention, hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy)
- Cognitive Impairment defined only as people with an inability to consent
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
United States3 sites
University of Colorado Hospital (UCH)
Aurora, Colorado, 80045
Kaiser Permanente of Colorado
Denver, Colorado, 80218
Denver VA Medical Center
Denver, Colorado, 80220
About this study
The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability and feasibility of a "toolkit" of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for heart failure patients who are considering an ICD implant.
Read the detailed description
Specific Aim 1: Examine acceptability and feasibility of a toolkit of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for patients with heart failure referred for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using a randomized control trial design across three diverse health care systems (Kaiser Colorado, The University of Colorado, and The Denver Veterans Hospital).
- Measure the acceptability of the decision aids
- Explore feasibility by measuring patient participation rates and adherence to the study protocol across all three sites.
- Conduct a preliminary assessment of outcomes by measuring changes in decision quality (knowledge and value concordance), quality of life, depressive symptoms, health status, and spiritual well-being.
Specific Aim 2: Determine the relative value of the various tools in the toolkit through in-depth interviews from study participants and providers at each intervention site
- Conditions
- Systolic Heart Failure, Sudden Cardiac Death
- Being tested
- ICD Decision Aid Toolkit
- Keywords
- decision aid, patient decision making, heart failure, ejection fraction, primary prevention, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, ICD, pilot trial, patient centered health care
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Failure, Systolic, Death, Sudden, Cardiac, Heart Failure
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ICD Decision Aid ToolkitBehavioural
Research assistants will provide patients with a toolkit of decision aids. Participants will have the option of using all of the decision aids or just some of the decision aids.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | No intervention | Patients will receive no additional ICD specific information other than what is offered by the clinic consistent with usual care. The control group will be asked where they went for information in the follow-up interviews. |
| ICD Decision Aid Toolkit | Experimental | In the intervention arm, research assistants will provide the patients with the toolkit of decision aids. At that time, participants will have the option of using all of the decision aids or just some of the decision aids. Participants who do not have access to the internet, will be offered a DVD (digital video disc) version of the video and they will be asked if they would like to arrange a visit where they can review the website with the research assistant. Receives: Behavioral: ICD Decision Aid Toolkit |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al.
Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al.
Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making.
Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
Measured: pre-ICD discussion - baseline
Secondary outcomes (3)
Determine relative value of the four decision aids
Determine the relative value of the various tools in the toolkit through in-depth interviews from study participants and providers at each intervention site.
We will ask participants the following questions:
- Have you made a decision about getting or not getting the ICD?
- What information did you use to make your decision?
- How are you feeling about your decision?
- What else would have been helpful in making your decision?
- (Intervention only) Did you use any of the decision aids you were given?
- If yes, please tell us how you used them? Did the decision aids make you feel better or worse about your decision? Did you like one of them better than the others? Is there any aspect that wasn't helpful?
- If no, please tell us why not? What would have been helpful?
- Do you have any advice on the best way to deliver these decision aids to future patients?
Measured: 3 months after baseline interview
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al.
Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al.
Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making.
Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
Measured: within 4 weeks of meeting with electrophysiologist
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al.
Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al.
Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making.
Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
Measured: 3 months after baseline interview
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2014
- Primary completionAug 2016
- Study completionNov 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Systolic Heart FailureStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Colorado, DenverThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Colorado, Denver
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Daniel D Matlock, MD, MPH, Principal investigator, University of Colorado, Denver
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02026102
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 13-3152
- Other IDs
- 121483
- Status last verified
- Oct 2019
- First submitted
- 12 Dec 2013
- Last updated
- 31 Oct 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
O'Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Moulton BW, Sepucha KR, Sodano AG, King JS. Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 May-Jun;26(3):716-25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.716.
PubMed 17485749O'Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D, Barry M, Col NF, Eden KB, Entwistle VA, Fiset V, Holmes-Rovner M, Khangura S, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Rovner D. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 8;(3):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub2.
PubMed 19588325Volandes AE, Paasche-Orlow MK, Barry MJ, Gillick MR, Minaker KL, Chang Y, Cook EF, Abbo ED, El-Jawahri A, Mitchell SL. Video decision support tool for advance care planning in dementia: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009 May 28;338:b2159. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2159.
PubMed 19477893Col NF, Ngo L, Fortin JM, Goldberg RJ, O'Connor AM. Can computerized decision support help patients make complex treatment decisions? A randomized controlled trial of an individualized menopause decision aid. Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):585-98. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07306781. Epub 2007 Sep 14.
PubMed 17873260Jibaja-Weiss ML, Volk RJ, Granchi TS, Neff NE, Robinson EK, Spann SJ, Aoki N, Friedman LC, Beck JR. Entertainment education for breast cancer surgery decisions: a randomized trial among patients with low health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Jul;84(1):41-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.009. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
PubMed 20609546Stevenson LW, Desai AS. Selecting patients for discussion of the ICD as primary prevention for sudden death in heart failure. J Card Fail. 2006 Aug;12(6):407-12. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2006.06.001.
PubMed 16911905Bardy GH, Lee KL, Mark DB, Poole JE, Packer DL, Boineau R, Domanski M, Troutman C, Anderson J, Johnson G, McNulty SE, Clapp-Channing N, Davidson-Ray LD, Fraulo ES, Fishbein DP, Luceri RM, Ip JH; Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT) Investigators. Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2005 Jan 20;352(3):225-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043399.
PubMed 15659722Bristow MR, Saxon LA, Boehmer J, Krueger S, Kass DA, De Marco T, Carson P, DiCarlo L, DeMets D, White BG, DeVries DW, Feldman AM; Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) Investigators. Cardiac-resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable defibrillator in advanced chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2140-50. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032423.
PubMed 15152059Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, Klein H, Wilber DJ, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, Higgins SL, Brown MW, Andrews ML; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II Investigators. Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2002 Mar 21;346(12):877-83. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa013474. Epub 2002 Mar 19.
PubMed 11907286Kadish A, Dyer A, Daubert JP, Quigg R, Estes NA, Anderson KP, Calkins H, Hoch D, Goldberger J, Shalaby A, Sanders WE, Schaechter A, Levine JH; Defibrillators in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE) Investigators. Prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2151-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa033088.
PubMed 15152060Goldenberg I, Moss AJ, Hall WJ, McNitt S, Zareba W, Andrews ML, Cannom DS; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT) II Investigators. Causes and consequences of heart failure after prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial II. Circulation. 2006 Jun 20;113(24):2810-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.577262. Epub 2006 Jun 12.
PubMed 16769917Noyes K, Corona E, Zwanziger J, Hall WJ, Zhao H, Wang H, Moss AJ, Dick AW; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II. Health-related quality of life consequences of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: results from MADIT II. Med Care. 2007 May;45(5):377-85. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000257142.12600.c1.
PubMed 17446823Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sun JL, Clapp-Channing NE, Tsiatis AA, Davidson-Ray L, Lee KL, Bardy GH; Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial Investigators. Quality of life with defibrillator therapy or amiodarone in heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2008 Sep 4;359(10):999-1008. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0706719.
PubMed 18768943
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Oct 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Pilot Trial of Patient Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (ICDs)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02026102
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 13-3152
- Conditions
- Systolic Heart Failure, Sudden Cardiac Death
- Keywords
- decision aid, patient decision making, heart failure, ejection fraction, primary prevention, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, ICD, pilot trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Colorado, DenverUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2014
- Primary completion
- Aug 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability and feasibility of a "toolkit" of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for heart failure patients who are considering an ICD implant.
Detailed description
Specific Aim 1: Examine acceptability and feasibility of a toolkit of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for patients with heart failure referred for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using a randomized control trial design across three diverse health care systems (Kaiser Colorado, The University of Colorado, and The Denver Veterans Hospital).
- Measure the acceptability of the decision aids
- Explore feasibility by measuring patient participation rates and adherence to the study protocol across all three sites.
- Conduct a preliminary assessment of outcomes by measuring changes in decision quality (knowledge and value concordance), quality of life, depressive symptoms, health status, and spiritual well-being.
Specific Aim 2: Determine the relative value of the various tools in the toolkit through in-depth interviews from study participants and providers at each intervention site
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | No intervention | –Patients will receive no additional ICD specific information other than what is offered by the clinic consistent with usual care. The control group will be asked where they went for information in the follow-up interviews. |
| ICD Decision Aid Toolkit | Experimental | Behavioral: ICD Decision Aid ToolkitIn the intervention arm, research assistants will provide the patients with the toolkit of decision aids. At that time, participants will have the option of using all of the decision aids or just some of the decision aids. Participants who do not have access to the internet, will be offered a DVD (digital video disc) version of the video and they will be asked if they would like to arrange a visit where they can review the website with the research assistant. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- systolic heart failure (defined as an ejection fraction less than 35%)
- have been referred for a primary prevention ICD
- Note: Patients referred for an ICD with cardiac resynchronization therapy are NOT excluded.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Already have an ICD
- Non-English speaking (as the tools we have developed are only available in English currently)
- Other ICD indications (e.g. secondary prevention, hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy)
- Cognitive Impairment defined only as people with an inability to consent
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| ICD Decision Aid ToolkitResearch assistants will provide patients with a toolkit of decision aids. Participants will have the option of using all of the decision aids or just some of the decision aids. | Behavioural | ICD Decision Aid Toolkit |
Primary outcome
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Time frame: pre-ICD discussion - baseline
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al. Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al. Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making. Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
3 secondary outcomes
Determine relative value of the four decision aids
Time frame: 3 months after baseline interview
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Time frame: within 4 weeks of meeting with electrophysiologist
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Time frame: 3 months after baseline interview
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 Oct 2019.
- Background: PubMed 17485749O'Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Moulton BW, Sepucha KR, Sodano AG, King JS. Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 May-Jun;26(3):716-25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.716.
- Background: PubMed 19588325O'Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D, Barry M, Col NF, Eden KB, Entwistle VA, Fiset V, Holmes-Rovner M, Khangura S, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Rovner D. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 8;(3):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub2.
- Background: PubMed 19477893Volandes AE, Paasche-Orlow MK, Barry MJ, Gillick MR, Minaker KL, Chang Y, Cook EF, Abbo ED, El-Jawahri A, Mitchell SL. Video decision support tool for advance care planning in dementia: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009 May 28;338:b2159. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2159.
- Background: PubMed 17873260Col NF, Ngo L, Fortin JM, Goldberg RJ, O'Connor AM. Can computerized decision support help patients make complex treatment decisions? A randomized controlled trial of an individualized menopause decision aid. Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):585-98. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07306781. Epub 2007 Sep 14.
- Background: PubMed 20609546Jibaja-Weiss ML, Volk RJ, Granchi TS, Neff NE, Robinson EK, Spann SJ, Aoki N, Friedman LC, Beck JR. Entertainment education for breast cancer surgery decisions: a randomized trial among patients with low health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Jul;84(1):41-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.009. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
- Background: PubMed 16911905Stevenson LW, Desai AS. Selecting patients for discussion of the ICD as primary prevention for sudden death in heart failure. J Card Fail. 2006 Aug;12(6):407-12. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2006.06.001.
- Background: PubMed 15659722Bardy GH, Lee KL, Mark DB, Poole JE, Packer DL, Boineau R, Domanski M, Troutman C, Anderson J, Johnson G, McNulty SE, Clapp-Channing N, Davidson-Ray LD, Fraulo ES, Fishbein DP, Luceri RM, Ip JH; Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT) Investigators. Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2005 Jan 20;352(3):225-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043399.
- Background: PubMed 15152059Bristow MR, Saxon LA, Boehmer J, Krueger S, Kass DA, De Marco T, Carson P, DiCarlo L, DeMets D, White BG, DeVries DW, Feldman AM; Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) Investigators. Cardiac-resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable defibrillator in advanced chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2140-50. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032423.
- Background: PubMed 11907286Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, Klein H, Wilber DJ, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, Higgins SL, Brown MW, Andrews ML; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II Investigators. Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2002 Mar 21;346(12):877-83. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa013474. Epub 2002 Mar 19.
- Background: PubMed 15152060Kadish A, Dyer A, Daubert JP, Quigg R, Estes NA, Anderson KP, Calkins H, Hoch D, Goldberger J, Shalaby A, Sanders WE, Schaechter A, Levine JH; Defibrillators in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE) Investigators. Prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2151-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa033088.
- Background: PubMed 16769917Goldenberg I, Moss AJ, Hall WJ, McNitt S, Zareba W, Andrews ML, Cannom DS; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT) II Investigators. Causes and consequences of heart failure after prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial II. Circulation. 2006 Jun 20;113(24):2810-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.577262. Epub 2006 Jun 12.
- Background: PubMed 17446823Noyes K, Corona E, Zwanziger J, Hall WJ, Zhao H, Wang H, Moss AJ, Dick AW; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II. Health-related quality of life consequences of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: results from MADIT II. Med Care. 2007 May;45(5):377-85. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000257142.12600.c1.
- Decision Aid for Heart Failure Patients Considering an Implantable Cardioverter DefibrillatorLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Systolic Heart Failure
Not yet recruiting
RELIEVE-HFrEF TRIAL: REducing Lung congestIon Symptoms Using the v-wavE Shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure With Reduced EF
Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction, Heart Failure Chronic
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study of LY3971297 in Participants With Heart Failure
Heart Failure, Heart Failure, Diastolic
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Vericiguat in Pediatric Participants With Heart Failure Due to Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction (MK-1242-036)
Heart Failure, Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Learn More About How Safe Finerenone is, When it is Taken for a Longer Time With Standard Treatment, in Children and Young Adults With Heart Failure and Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction, Heart Failure (Pediatric)
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Endocardial Delivery for Myocardial Regeneration Using Allogeneic iPSC-derived Cardiomyocyte Spheroids for HF With Systolic Dysfunction (EMERALD Study)
Heart Failure, Ischemic Heart Failure
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Daniel D Matlock, MD, MPH principal investigator
University of Colorado, Denver
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing ICD Decision Aid Toolkit in people with Systolic Heart Failure and Sudden Cardiac Death, run by University of Colorado, Denver at 3 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Oct 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids (time frame: pre-ICD discussion - baseline). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02026102, which also lists 13 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Oct 2019.