Patient Self-management SupportINSTTEPPNCT02815020
Implementing Networks Self-management Tools Through Engaging Patients and Practices
A study testing Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory process in people with Patient Self-management Support, run by Oregon Health and Science University.
Trial summary
The purpose of this project is to use the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient self-management support tools and resources across four practice-based research networks and 16 member practices using a community-based participatory intervention called Boot Camp Translation. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Patient Self-management Support
- What is being tested?
- Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory process
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 467 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Feb 2014to Mar 2015
- 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 to 70 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Clinicians and office staff for small- to medium-sized practices
- Patients regularly interacting with care manager
- Patients having at least one chronic health condition
- Ages 18-70
Who cannot join
- Large or health system practice setting
- Non-English speaking
About this study
The purpose of this project is to use the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient self-management support tools and resources across four practice-based research networks and 16 member practices using a community-based participatory intervention called Boot Camp Translation.
Read the detailed description
Specific Aim 1: Implement the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality SMS Resources and Tools (SMS Library/Toolkit) across four participating networks and 16 practices using Boot Camp Translation in a stepped-wedge design.
Specific Aim 2: Assess the impact of implementation on practice staff and patients engaged in chronic care management.
Specific Aim 3: Identify the factors related to successful implementation.
Background and Significance:
With almost one-half of Americans projected to have at least one chronic condition before 2020 it will be paramount that the health care system reduce the burden to primary care for disease management by facilitating the development of activated, informed individuals who are proficient in self-management skills. This represents a significant cultural shift in health management, and clinicians and staff may lack confidence introducing and promoting self-management support (SMS). In fact, SMS is the area of disease management least often implemented and most challenging to integrate into usual care. This difficulty occurs at the patient and clinician level. Using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), Hibbard and colleagues found that 60% of patients feel passive about managing their own health and a third of patients had barriers in knowledge and confidence in caring for themselves.
The chronic care model describes SMS as one of six key pillars for providing effective primary care. A systematic review of the Chronic Care Model applied to diabetes care found that although not a single component of the care model emerged as essential, 19 of 20 interventions that included a self-management component resulted in improved processes or outcomes of care. Under the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, primary care practices have moved to team-based care and care coordination, putting the patient in the center of care model. Primary care practices are beginning to provide care coordination services, identifying and training care managers to deliver care to complex patients with chronic illnesses. This has been shown to be cost-effective with a high degree of patient acceptance.
The four Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) participating in this protocol are part of the Meta-network Learning And Research Center (Meta-LARC). In 2012 AHRQ awarded the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN) a 5-year award as a Center of Excellence in Primary Care Practice-based Research and Learning. This support enabled ORPRN to establish a collaborative center with the participating PBRNs, using center infrastructure for data collection and management.
Patient involvement has progressed to informing approaches for knowledge transfer with Boot Camp Translation (BCT). BCT provides a partnership model where patients are at the elbow with primary care clinicians and staff to refine best practices of care at the local level. The study uses BCT to increase patient skills and engagement in improving their health. It incorporates the BCT model and findings through the interpretive- and theory-based lenses of the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research and the Theory of Planned Behavior, as well as intermediate outcome measures of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and Clinician Support for Patient Activation Measure (CS-PAM), to provide the foundation for clinicians, care managers, patients, practice facilitators and researchers to develop optimal strategies to make the case for self-management skills and to implement and evaluate the SMS Library/Toolkit. Using a stepped wedge study design, these strategies will be replicated and improved across all four PBRNs, resulting in tools and a process that can be readily reproduced in other primary care practices.
Primary outcomes will include the CS-PAM scores at baseline, and the end of T2, T3, T4, and T5 implementation periods. The structure of the data is hierarchical (individuals nested within practices) and longitudinal (repeated measures on individuals over time).
This specific aim and hypotheses will be approached using a mixed methods evaluation. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs will be assessed among practice staff in each study time period using a survey instrument to measure intention, attitude, social norm and perceived behavior control towards use of the SMS Library/Toolkit. The direct measure of attitude will be assessed by means of six items using a semantic differential 7-point scale. Six pairs of adjectives will be used to assess Aact: for example, "not very useful/very useful" or "not very responsible/very responsible". These adjectives will follow sentence: "In the context of chronic care management, for me, using items from the SMS Library/Toolkit would be …". Direct measure of the social norm (SN) will be assessed by means of three items, each assessed on a 7-point scale. Three items will be included to assess a direct measure of the perceived behavioral control (PBC), each on a 7-point response scale. Finally, intention to use the SMS library/toolkit will be assessed by means of three items. The mean composite scores of the items assessing each TPB construct will be computed. For all above variables, a positive score indicates that the respondent expressed a positive evaluation of the construct.
The assessment of SMS Library/Toolkit implementation will rely on multiple data sources to fully evaluate "what works and where" across different practice settings. Semi-structured key informant interviews and guided practice observation comprise the primary data sources. Interview and observation guides will use open-ended question, probes, and cues to elicit responses and data about key implementation domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting (external influences), internal setting, individual characteristics, and implementation processes.
The semi-structured data will be supplemented with closed-ended survey questions (asked in-person or self-administered) for questions that can efficiently provide descriptive results using categorical or numeric responses. This includes items related to practice demographics (e.g., number of providers and staff, patient population, payer mix), individual characteristics (e.g., level of training, years in practice, age). This data will be analyzed using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to identify the specific components within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains that are important for successful implementation of the Library/Toolkit.
Stepped wedge study design Stepped wedge methods are used for testing interventions that involve communities or situations where traditional randomized controlled trial methods are not possible. The investigators will randomize the order in which the BCT process is implemented within each participating PBRN. Each networks' participating practices will receive the BCT intervention at different points along a 10-month period. This will permit the investigators to have a two-month period at the beginning of the study period where all practices are in a control state for baseline assessment, and gradually implement the BCT process over the subsequent eight months.
- Conditions
- Patient Self-management Support
- Being tested
- Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory process
- Keywords
- Primary care, Self-management support, Care coordination, Practice-based research network
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory processOther
Series of meetings and conference calls with expert presentation on patient self-management support, facilitated discussion, and creation of product to bring to community to improve patient self-management support
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Boot Camp Translation | Other | Boot Camp Translation is rolled out in a stepped wedge design across participating PBRNs to assist practices with SMS implementation. The Boot Camp Translation "intervention" initiates practices to review and begin uptake and implementation of tools from the AHRQ Self-Management Support tool library. Receives: Other: Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory process |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Primary measure for CS-PAM
The CS-PAM will be used to assess the attitudes of practice clinicians and clinical staff toward self-management. This instrument will be administered to practices five times during the project with a control measurement period followed by four implementation periods of two months. The data structure is hierarchical (individuals nested within practices) and longitudinal (repeated measures on individuals over time).
Measured: Changes from baseline, 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 8 months into implementation periods
Secondary outcomes (2)
Theory of Planned Behavior measurement of individual caregiver intention to change
Theory of Planned Behavior constructs will be assessed among practice staff in each study time period using the survey instrument with a 7-point scale to measure intention, attitude, social norm and perceived behavior control towards use of the SMS Library/Toolkit. The direct measure of attitude (Aact) will be assessed by means of six items using a semantic differential 7-point scale. Six pairs of adjectives will be used to assess Aact: for example, "not very useful/very useful" following: "In the context of chronic care management, for me, using items from the SMS Library/Toolkit would be …" Direct measure of the social norm and intention to use the SMS toolkit will both be assessed by means of three items reported by mean composite. The mean composite scores of the items assessing each TPB construct will be computed. For all above variables, a positive score indicates that the respondent expressed a positive evaluation of the construct.
Measured: Changes from baseline, 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 8 months into implementation periods
A mixed methods assessment of barriers and facilitators to implementation
Assessment of SMS Library/Toolkit implementation will rely on key informant interviews and guided practice observation to evaluate "what works and where" across different practice settings. Interview and observation guides use open-ended questions, probes, and cues to elicit responses and data about key implementation domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting (external influences), internal setting, individual characteristics, and implementation processes. The semi-structured data are supplemented with closed-ended survey questions for questions that can efficiently provide descriptive results using categorical or numeric responses. This includes items related to practice demographics (e.g., #providers and staff, patient population, payer mix), individual characteristics (e.g., level of training, years in practice, age). This data will be analyzed using Qualitative Comparative Analytic framework.
Measured: 1 month and 3 months after Boot Camp Translation
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Jun 2016 (estimated)
- Study startFeb 2014
- Primary completionMar 2015
- Study completionMar 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Patient Self-management SupportStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 467 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Oregon Health and Science University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Colorado, Denver, University of Iowa, University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Lyle J. Fagnan, Oregon Health and Science University
- Investigators
- Donald Nease, MD, Study director, University of Colorado, DenverLyle J Fagnan, MD, Principal investigator, Oregon Health and Science University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02815020
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1R18HS02249
- Acronym
- INSTTEPP
- Status last verified
- Jun 2016
- First submitted
- 31 May 2016
- Last updated
- 28 Jun 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Jun 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Implementing Networks Self-management Tools Through Engaging Patients and Practices
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02815020
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- INSTTEPP / 1R18HS02249
- Conditions
- Patient Self-management Support
- Keywords
- Primary care, Self-management support, Care coordination, Practice-based research network
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 467 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Oregon Health and Science UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Colorado, Denver, University of Iowa, University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Study start
- Feb 2014
- Primary completion
- Mar 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Jun 2016 (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 project is to use the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient self-management support tools and resources across four practice-based research networks and 16 member practices using a community-based participatory intervention called Boot Camp Translation.
Detailed description
Specific Aim 1: Implement the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality SMS Resources and Tools (SMS Library/Toolkit) across four participating networks and 16 practices using Boot Camp Translation in a stepped-wedge design.
Specific Aim 2: Assess the impact of implementation on practice staff and patients engaged in chronic care management.
Specific Aim 3: Identify the factors related to successful implementation.
Background and Significance:
With almost one-half of Americans projected to have at least one chronic condition before 2020 it will be paramount that the health care system reduce the burden to primary care for disease management by facilitating the development of activated, informed individuals who are proficient in self-management skills. This represents a significant cultural shift in health management, and clinicians and staff may lack confidence introducing and promoting self-management support (SMS). In fact, SMS is the area of disease management least often implemented and most challenging to integrate into usual care. This difficulty occurs at the patient and clinician level. Using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), Hibbard and colleagues found that 60% of patients feel passive about managing their own health and a third of patients had barriers in knowledge and confidence in caring for themselves.
The chronic care model describes SMS as one of six key pillars for providing effective primary care. A systematic review of the Chronic Care Model applied to diabetes care found that although not a single component of the care model emerged as essential, 19 of 20 interventions that included a self-management component resulted in improved processes or outcomes of care. Under the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model, primary care practices have moved to team-based care and care coordination, putting the patient in the center of care model. Primary care practices are beginning to provide care coordination services, identifying and training care managers to deliver care to complex patients with chronic illnesses. This has been shown to be cost-effective with a high degree of patient acceptance.
The four Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) participating in this protocol are part of the Meta-network Learning And Research Center (Meta-LARC). In 2012 AHRQ awarded the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN) a 5-year award as a Center of Excellence in Primary Care Practice-based Research and Learning. This support enabled ORPRN to establish a collaborative center with the participating PBRNs, using center infrastructure for data collection and management.
Patient involvement has progressed to informing approaches for knowledge transfer with Boot Camp Translation (BCT). BCT provides a partnership model where patients are at the elbow with primary care clinicians and staff to refine best practices of care at the local level. The study uses BCT to increase patient skills and engagement in improving their health. It incorporates the BCT model and findings through the interpretive- and theory-based lenses of the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research and the Theory of Planned Behavior, as well as intermediate outcome measures of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and Clinician Support for Patient Activation Measure (CS-PAM), to provide the foundation for clinicians, care managers, patients, practice facilitators and researchers to develop optimal strategies to make the case for self-management skills and to implement and evaluate the SMS Library/Toolkit. Using a stepped wedge study design, these strategies will be replicated and improved across all four PBRNs, resulting in tools and a process that can be readily reproduced in other primary care practices.
Primary outcomes will include the CS-PAM scores at baseline, and the end of T2, T3, T4, and T5 implementation periods. The structure of the data is hierarchical (individuals nested within practices) and longitudinal (repeated measures on individuals over time).
This specific aim and hypotheses will be approached using a mixed methods evaluation. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs will be assessed among practice staff in each study time period using a survey instrument to measure intention, attitude, social norm and perceived behavior control towards use of the SMS Library/Toolkit. The direct measure of attitude will be assessed by means of six items using a semantic differential 7-point scale. Six pairs of adjectives will be used to assess Aact: for example, "not very useful/very useful" or "not very responsible/very responsible". These adjectives will follow sentence: "In the context of chronic care management, for me, using items from the SMS Library/Toolkit would be …". Direct measure of the social norm (SN) will be assessed by means of three items, each assessed on a 7-point scale. Three items will be included to assess a direct measure of the perceived behavioral control (PBC), each on a 7-point response scale. Finally, intention to use the SMS library/toolkit will be assessed by means of three items. The mean composite scores of the items assessing each TPB construct will be computed. For all above variables, a positive score indicates that the respondent expressed a positive evaluation of the construct.
The assessment of SMS Library/Toolkit implementation will rely on multiple data sources to fully evaluate "what works and where" across different practice settings. Semi-structured key informant interviews and guided practice observation comprise the primary data sources. Interview and observation guides will use open-ended question, probes, and cues to elicit responses and data about key implementation domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting (external influences), internal setting, individual characteristics, and implementation processes.
The semi-structured data will be supplemented with closed-ended survey questions (asked in-person or self-administered) for questions that can efficiently provide descriptive results using categorical or numeric responses. This includes items related to practice demographics (e.g., number of providers and staff, patient population, payer mix), individual characteristics (e.g., level of training, years in practice, age). This data will be analyzed using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to identify the specific components within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains that are important for successful implementation of the Library/Toolkit.
Stepped wedge study design Stepped wedge methods are used for testing interventions that involve communities or situations where traditional randomized controlled trial methods are not possible. The investigators will randomize the order in which the BCT process is implemented within each participating PBRN. Each networks' participating practices will receive the BCT intervention at different points along a 10-month period. This will permit the investigators to have a two-month period at the beginning of the study period where all practices are in a control state for baseline assessment, and gradually implement the BCT process over the subsequent eight months.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Boot Camp Translation | Other | Other: Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory processBoot Camp Translation is rolled out in a stepped wedge design across participating PBRNs to assist practices with SMS implementation. The Boot Camp Translation "intervention" initiates practices to review and begin uptake and implementation of tools from the AHRQ Self-Management Support tool library. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Clinicians and office staff for small- to medium-sized practices
- Patients regularly interacting with care manager
- Patients having at least one chronic health condition
- Ages 18-70
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Large or health system practice setting
- Non-English speaking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory processSeries of meetings and conference calls with expert presentation on patient self-management support, facilitated discussion, and creation of product to bring to community to improve patient self-management support | Other | Boot Camp Translation |
Primary outcome
Primary measure for CS-PAM
Time frame: Changes from baseline, 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 8 months into implementation periods
The CS-PAM will be used to assess the attitudes of practice clinicians and clinical staff toward self-management. This instrument will be administered to practices five times during the project with a control measurement period followed by four implementation periods of two months. The data structure is hierarchical (individuals nested within practices) and longitudinal (repeated measures on individuals over time).
2 secondary outcomes
Theory of Planned Behavior measurement of individual caregiver intention to change
Time frame: Changes from baseline, 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 8 months into implementation periods
A mixed methods assessment of barriers and facilitators to implementation
Time frame: 1 month and 3 months after Boot Camp Translation
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 28 Jun 2016.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Patient Self-management Support
Active, not recruiting
Empowering Faith-based Communities to Provide Personalized Diabetes Self-management Education and Support (DSMES) in the Magic City
Blood Cholesterol, Blood Pressure Monitoring
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation of National Highly Specialized Care for Adults With Treatment-Resistant Self-Harm and Eating Disorders: Substudy 1
Self-harm Behavior, Eating Disorders
Not yet recruiting
SUPPORT-HEART-PK: Effectiveness, Implementation, and Cost-Effectiveness of a Theory-Based, RE-AIM-Informed Digital Self-Management Intervention for Heart Failure in Pakistan-A Hybrid Type 1 Effectiveness-Implementation Randomized Controlled Trial
Heart Failure, Chronic Heart Failure (CHF)
Not yet recruiting
DialysisBot: AI Chatbot for Hemodialysis Self-Management
Chatbot-Based Training, Hemodialysis
Recruiting
Artificial Intelligence-supported Mobile Application for Patients With Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer, Chemotherapy Side Effects
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.
Donald Nease, MD study director
University of Colorado, Denver
Lyle J Fagnan, MD principal investigator
Oregon Health and Science University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Boot Camp Translation - community-participatory process in people with Patient Self-management Support, run by Oregon Health and Science University.
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 4 inclusion and 2 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 28 Jun 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
Primary measure for CS-PAM (time frame: Changes from baseline, 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 8 months into implementation periods). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 28 Jun 2016.