ImmunizationSTOP-HPVNCT03599583
The STOP-HPV Trial 3: Prompts Intervention
A study testing STOP-HPV prompts intervention in people with Immunization and Vaccination, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Most adolescents who receive human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine are vaccinated in pediatric practices, yet missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination occur often and lead to low HPV vaccination rates. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 11 to 17 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Immunization, Vaccination
- What is being tested?
- STOP-HPV prompts intervention
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 48 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 7 Aug 2018to 15 Jul 2022
- 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 11 to 17 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child
Practice Inclusion Criteria:
- The practice provides HPV vaccination services to adolescents.
- The practice is part of Physician's Computer Company (PCC), Office Practicum (OP) or (a) yet-to-be selected health system(s).
- The practice has had the same EHR system in place for a year or more (with special consideration on a case by case basis if they are close to but not do not reach a year).
- The practice agrees to not participate in other HPV-related QI projects or research interventions during the study period (with special consideration on a case by case basis).
Practice Exclusion Criteria:
- The practice plans to change EHR systems in the next three years.
- The practice participated in the last year, is currently engaged in, or plans to participate in an office-based HPV-related quality improvement (QI) project or research intervention during the study period (with special consideration on a case by case basis).
- Estimated 20% or more of adolescents at the practice receive HPV vaccinations at schools or health department clinics (given standard practice and published data, the investigators expect that few to no practices will need to be excluded based on this restriction).
Patient inclusion criteria:
-All patients of participating practices (intervention and comparison) aged 11-17 years who have at least 1 visit to the practice within the past two years.
Patient exclusion criteria:
-None apart from age of patients (above).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
American Academy of Pediatrics
Itasca, Illinois, 60143
About this study
Official title: Improving HPV Vaccination Delivery in Pediatric Primary Care: The STOP-HPV Trial 3. Comparison of Prompts (in the Presence of Communication Skills and Performance Feedback) and Standard of Care
Most adolescents who receive human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine are vaccinated in pediatric practices, yet missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination occur often and lead to low HPV vaccination rates. This study is part of a series of cluster randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that will test the effectiveness (and cost-effectiveness) of the addition of prompts (period 3) to performance feedback (period 2, continued through period 3) and training providers previously received on HPV vaccine communication (period 1) to reduce MOs and increase HPV vaccination rates.
Read the detailed description
This intervention will incorporate prompts via electronic health record (EHR) (e.g. alerts in electronic charts indicating patient is due for vaccination) and study practice staff prompts (reminders from study staff that a patient is due for vaccination, e.g. placing Vaccine Information Statements (VISs) on desk) to study practitioners that encourage HPV vaccination at all visits. An initial learning module on practitioner prompts will highlight how study practices can consistently implement both EHR and staff HPV vaccination prompts at all visits. Throughout the intervention, text message mini-lessons will remind participants how to best use prompts via EHR and/or office staff to improve HPV vaccination rates. This trial focuses on study period 3 where study periods are as follows:
Period 0: Baseline period, prior to the randomization of practices into intervention arms
Period 1: Arm-1 intervention study practices receive communication skills training; Arm-2 comparison study practices provide standard of care. Period 2: Arm-1 intervention study practices add performance feedback, building upon their prior training in communication skills; Arm-2 comparison study practices continue delivering standard of care. Period 3: Arm-1 intervention study practices add prompts, building upon prior communication skills and performance feedback; Arm-2 comparison study practices continue with standard of care.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, an additional 15-month study period (Pause Period) was introduced between feedback (Period 2) and prompts (Period 3). No study activities were undertaken during this time.
The prompts intervention effect will be interpreted within the context of the previous periods (Periods 0, 1 and 2) and the pause period.
- Conditions
- Immunization, Vaccination
- Being tested
- STOP-HPV prompts intervention
- Keywords
- HPV, Vaccination, Practice based intervention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
STOP-HPV prompts interventionBehavioural
This intervention will be the addition of the prompts intervention (in the presence of communication skills training and continued performance feedback).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Arm 1 will receive the STOP-HPV prompts intervention Receives: Behavioral: STOP-HPV prompts intervention |
| Control | No intervention | Arm 2 will receive standard of care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among all clinicians
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities separately by dose (initial vs. subsequent) and visit type (preventive vs. acute) among all clinicians.
Measured: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among consenting clinicians
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities separately by dose (initial vs. subsequent) and visit type (preventive vs. acute) among consenting clinicians
Measured: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among clinicians, excluding practices that failed to meet inclusion criteria throughout the study period.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities separately by dose (initial vs. subsequent) and visit type (preventive vs. acute) excluding practices that failed to meet inclusion criteria throughout the study period.
Measured: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jul 2018
- Study start7 Aug 2018
- Primary completion15 Jul 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion15 Jul 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for ImmunizationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, Los AngelesThe 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
- Model description
- RCT study design will test the impact of the prompts intervention to reduce missed opportunities and raise HPV vaccine rates.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 48 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los Angeles
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, American Academy of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania, National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute (NCI), University of Rochester
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Peter G Szilagyi, MD MPH, University of California, Los Angeles
- Investigators
- Peter Szilagyi, MD, Principal investigator, University of California, Los Angeles
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03599583
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 3R01CA202261
- Other IDs
- R01CA202261
- Acronym
- STOP-HPV
- Status last verified
- Jan 2022
- First submitted
- 29 Jun 2018
- Last updated
- 12 Jan 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Jan 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Improving HPV Vaccination Delivery in Pediatric Primary Care: The STOP-HPV Trial 3. Comparison of Prompts (in the Presence of Communication Skills and Performance Feedback) and Standard of Care
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03599583
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STOP-HPV / 3R01CA202261
- Conditions
- Immunization, Vaccination
- Keywords
- HPV, Vaccination, Practice based intervention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 48 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los AngelesUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, American Academy of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania, National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute (NCI), University of Rochester
- Study start
- 7 Aug 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jul 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 15 Jul 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 26 Jul 2018 (actual)
- 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.
Most adolescents who receive human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine are vaccinated in pediatric practices, yet missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination occur often and lead to low HPV vaccination rates. This study is part of a series of cluster randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that will test the effectiveness (and cost-effectiveness) of the addition of prompts (period 3) to performance feedback (period 2, continued through period 3) and training providers previously received on HPV vaccine communication (period 1) to reduce MOs and increase HPV vaccination rates.
Detailed description
This intervention will incorporate prompts via electronic health record (EHR) (e.g. alerts in electronic charts indicating patient is due for vaccination) and study practice staff prompts (reminders from study staff that a patient is due for vaccination, e.g. placing Vaccine Information Statements (VISs) on desk) to study practitioners that encourage HPV vaccination at all visits. An initial learning module on practitioner prompts will highlight how study practices can consistently implement both EHR and staff HPV vaccination prompts at all visits. Throughout the intervention, text message mini-lessons will remind participants how to best use prompts via EHR and/or office staff to improve HPV vaccination rates. This trial focuses on study period 3 where study periods are as follows:
Period 0: Baseline period, prior to the randomization of practices into intervention arms
Period 1: Arm-1 intervention study practices receive communication skills training; Arm-2 comparison study practices provide standard of care. Period 2: Arm-1 intervention study practices add performance feedback, building upon their prior training in communication skills; Arm-2 comparison study practices continue delivering standard of care. Period 3: Arm-1 intervention study practices add prompts, building upon prior communication skills and performance feedback; Arm-2 comparison study practices continue with standard of care.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, an additional 15-month study period (Pause Period) was introduced between feedback (Period 2) and prompts (Period 3). No study activities were undertaken during this time.
The prompts intervention effect will be interpreted within the context of the previous periods (Periods 0, 1 and 2) and the pause period.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- RCT study design will test the impact of the prompts intervention to reduce missed opportunities and raise HPV vaccine rates.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: STOP-HPV prompts interventionArm 1 will receive the STOP-HPV prompts intervention |
| Control | No intervention | –Arm 2 will receive standard of care |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 11 to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child
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 |
|---|---|---|
| STOP-HPV prompts interventionThis intervention will be the addition of the prompts intervention (in the presence of communication skills training and continued performance feedback). | Behavioural | Intervention |
Primary outcome
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among all clinicians
Time frame: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities separately by dose (initial vs. subsequent) and visit type (preventive vs. acute) among all clinicians.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among consenting clinicians
Time frame: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up.
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities separately by dose (initial vs. subsequent) and visit type (preventive vs. acute) among consenting clinicians
1 secondary outcome
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among clinicians, excluding practices that failed to meet inclusion criteria throughout the study period.
Time frame: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Jan 2022.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Immunization
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Safety and Immunogenicity of Recombinant Varicella Zoster Virus Vaccine in People With HIV Who Have a CD4 Count Less Than 300 or Greater Than or Equal to 300 and a Healthy Control Population
Herpes Zoster
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Korean Post Marketing Surveillance for Comirnaty Injection (Bretovameran)
COVID-19 Vaccination
Recruiting
Culturally Targeted Health Communication and Receptivity to the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Among Parents in Flint, MI
HPV Vaccination
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
PREVENT HPV -Related Cancers Trial
HPV Vaccination, Uptake Vaccination
Active, not recruiting
HPV Multilevel Intervention Strategies Targeting Immunization in Community Settings (HPV MISTICS)
Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Vaccine
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.
Peter Szilagyi, MD principal investigator
University of California, Los Angeles
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing STOP-HPV prompts intervention in people with Immunization and Vaccination, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site 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?
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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Jan 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
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?
Change in the rate of missed vaccination opportunities among all clinicians (time frame: The 12-month portion of the pause period immediately preceding initiation of prompts and the 6-month prompts period, excluding the 4-week ramp-up.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 12 Jan 2022.