COVID-19 InfectionNCT05102656
Patient Perceptions of the Relational Empathy of Healthcare Practitioners From the Department of Emergency Medicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic
A study testing Best Practice, Discussion and Questionnaire Administration in people with COVID-19 Infection and Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Cell Neoplasm, run by M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study investigates patients' perceptions of their doctor's or nurse's empathy during an in-person interaction with the doctor or nurse wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) compared to during a video interaction with the doctor or nurse without PPE. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- COVID-19 Infection, Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Cell Neoplasm, Malignant Solid Neoplasm
- What is being tested?
- Best Practice, Discussion and Questionnaire Administration
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 107 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 2 Jun 2021to 2 Feb 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
- >= 18 years old
- Able to speak and write in English
- Able to understand and willing to sign a written informed consent document
- Willing and able to complete the study assessment(s)
Who cannot join
- Refuses to participate
- Too ill to participate, in the estimation of the patient's physician
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Patient Perceptions of the Relational Empathy of Healthcare Practitioners From the Department of Emergency Medicine During COVID-19: A Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing In-Person Interaction With Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Versus Video Interaction Without PPE
This study investigates patients' perceptions of their doctor's or nurse's empathy during an in-person interaction with the doctor or nurse wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) compared to during a video interaction with the doctor or nurse without PPE. The goal of this research study is to learn whether patients who visit the Acute Cancer Care Center at MD Anderson believe they get better (more empathetic) care from doctors who visit them in person wearing PPE or from doctors who visit them by video call and do not wear PPE.
Read the detailed description
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:
- To determine whether patients perceive their healthcare practitioner as more empathetic during an in-person interaction with the practitioner wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), or during a video interaction without the need for PPE.
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
- To assess whether certain physicians perform better with video whereas others perform better in person.
II. To characterize generational differences in patient perception of healthcare practitioner empathy during an in person interaction with the practitioner wearing PPE, or during a video interaction without the need for PPE.
OUTLINE: After initial visit, patients are randomized to 1 of 2 groups.
GROUP A (NO PPE): Patients receive standard of care via video call with treating physician.
GROUP B (WEARING PPE): Patients receive standard of care in-person physician visits.
- Being tested
- Best Practice, Discussion, Questionnaire Administration
- Medical subject headings
- COVID-19, Hematologic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Best PracticeOther
Also called standard of care, standard therapy
Physician conversations occur in-person
DiscussionProcedure or surgery
Also called Discuss
Physician conversations occur via video call
Questionnaire AdministrationOther
Ancillary studies
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group A (video call) | Other | Patients receive standard of care via video call with treating physician. Receives: Procedure: Discussion; Other: Questionnaire Administration |
| Group B (in-person) | Other | Patients receive standard of care in-person physician visits. Receives: Other: Best Practice; Other: Questionnaire Administration |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patients' perceptions of healthcare provider empathy
Univariate linear regression analysis will be used to determine the association between the approach (in-person interaction/with personal protective equipment [PPE] versus video interaction/without PPE) and the composite scores or scores for each question (for each of the two tools [the CARE Measure and the linear empathy tool]).
Measured: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Nov 2021
- Study start2 Jun 2021
- Primary completion2 Feb 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion2 Feb 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for COVID-19 InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterThe 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Kumar Alagappan, Principal investigator, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05102656
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2020-1298
- Other IDs
- NCI-2021-10960, 2020-1298
- Status last verified
- May 2026
- First submitted
- 29 Oct 2021
- Last updated
- 20 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Patient Perceptions of the Relational Empathy of Healthcare Practitioners From the Department of Emergency Medicine During COVID-19: A Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing In-Person Interaction With Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Versus Video Interaction Without PPE
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05102656
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2020-1298
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Feb 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 2 Feb 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 1 Nov 2021 (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.
This study investigates patients' perceptions of their doctor's or nurse's empathy during an in-person interaction with the doctor or nurse wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) compared to during a video interaction with the doctor or nurse without PPE. The goal of this research study is to learn whether patients who visit the Acute Cancer Care Center at MD Anderson believe they get better (more empathetic) care from doctors who visit them in person wearing PPE or from doctors who visit them by video call and do not wear PPE.
Detailed description
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:
- To determine whether patients perceive their healthcare practitioner as more empathetic during an in-person interaction with the practitioner wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), or during a video interaction without the need for PPE.
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
- To assess whether certain physicians perform better with video whereas others perform better in person.
II. To characterize generational differences in patient perception of healthcare practitioner empathy during an in person interaction with the practitioner wearing PPE, or during a video interaction without the need for PPE.
OUTLINE: After initial visit, patients are randomized to 1 of 2 groups.
GROUP A (NO PPE): Patients receive standard of care via video call with treating physician.
GROUP B (WEARING PPE): Patients receive standard of care in-person physician visits.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group A (video call) | Other | Procedure: Discussion, Other: Questionnaire AdministrationPatients receive standard of care via video call with treating physician. |
| Group B (in-person) | Other | Other: Best Practice, Other: Questionnaire AdministrationPatients receive standard of care in-person physician visits. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- >= 18 years old
- Able to speak and write in English
- Able to understand and willing to sign a written informed consent document
- Willing and able to complete the study assessment(s)
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Refuses to participate
- Too ill to participate, in the estimation of the patient's physician
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Best PracticeAlso: standard of care, standard therapyPhysician conversations occur in-person | Other | Group B (in-person) |
| DiscussionAlso: DiscussPhysician conversations occur via video call | Procedure or surgery | Group A (video call) |
| Questionnaire AdministrationAncillary studies | Other | Group A (video call), Group B (in-person) |
Primary outcome
Patients' perceptions of healthcare provider empathy
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
Univariate linear regression analysis will be used to determine the association between the approach (in-person interaction/with personal protective equipment [PPE] versus video interaction/without PPE) and the composite scores or scores for each question (for each of the two tools [the CARE Measure and the linear empathy tool]).
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 May 2026.
- M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for COVID-19 Infection
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Phase I Open-Label Safety Trial of Pembrolizumab for Neurological Post- Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PD1-PASC I)
Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Safety and Immunogenicity Trial of OCU500, ChAd36 Vector Encoding SARS-CoV-2 Spike Vaccine Via Intranasal and Inhalational Routes in Previously Vaccinated Adults
COVID-19
Active, not recruiting
Intervention to Address Disparate Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 Pandemic on Latinx and African Newcomers
Mental Health Issue, Mental Health Disorder
Recruiting
Home-Based Exercise Tele-Rehabilitation After COVID-19
Post SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19)
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Safety, Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity Trial of RVX-sCPD9 Booster Intranasal COVID-19 Vaccine
COVID -19
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.
Kumar Alagappan principal investigator
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Best Practice, Discussion and Questionnaire Administration in people with COVID-19 Infection and Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Cell Neoplasm, run by M.D. Anderson Cancer Center 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?
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: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 May 2026. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Patients' perceptions of healthcare provider empathy (time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year). 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 20 May 2026.