Kidney DiseasesHIGHwayNCT05324878
Honoring Individual Goals and Hopes: Implementing Advance Care Planning for Persons With Kidney Disease on Dialysis
An observational study of Kidney Diseases and Kidney Failure, run by George Washington University at 3 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The PCORI HIGHway project name embodies its goal: the way to "Honor Individuals Goals and Hopes". HIGHway trains and supports dialysis center social workers and nurses to communicate with their patients about their hopes and goals for their future care plans. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Kidney Diseases, Kidney Failure
- What is being tested?
- Training
- How many people
- 55 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2021to 31 Jul 2024
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: There are three separate study populations for this study, with procedures and instruments specific to the population Population 1: Social workers/nurses and dialysis centers will be selected based on demographic data of the center (urbanicity, population served, size of center, patients treated, etc) to provide for diversity of centers participating. Population 2: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center where participating social worker/nurses works. 2a. When an advance care planning conversation takes place, social worker/nurse will provide patient with an informational flyer about the HIGHway project and a postcard. 2b. Social worker/nurse will identify one patient willing to have a recording made of advance care planning conversation between social worker/nurse and patient.
Who may be able to join
- Social worker or nurse must work at a participating dialysis center.
- Social worker, nurse and patients must speak, read and write English.
- All participants must be 18 y old.
- Social workers and nurses Commitment to attend initial 6-h training and booster sessions.
Who cannot join
- Under 18 years old
- Unable to speak, read and write English
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
United States3 sites
American Renal Associates LLC Corporate Office
Beverly, Massachusetts, 01915
DaVita World Headquarters
Denver, Colorado, 80202
Fresenius Medical Care Corporate Headquarters
Waltham, Massachusetts, 02451
About this study
Official title: HIGHway Project: Honoring Individual Goals and Hopes: Implementing Advance Care Planning for Persons With Kidney Disease on Dialysis
The PCORI HIGHway project name embodies its goal: the way to "Honor Individuals Goals and Hopes". HIGHway trains and supports dialysis center social workers and nurses to communicate with their patients about their hopes and goals for their future care plans. This process, known as advance care planning (ACP), helps relieve patient concerns about the future, lays the foundation for better goal-concordant care at the end of life, and fosters deeper connection between patient and the dialysis care team. The HIGHway project will provide training and ongoing coaching to social workers and other change team members at 50-60 dialysis centers throughout the US. The goal is to integrate advance care planning conversations between dialysis patients and their health care team into the ongoing workflow of dialysis centers. The project is funded by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), a non-profit organization chartered by Congress to fund projects to promote patient-centered care.
Read the detailed description
OBJECTIVES Primary Objective: The HIGHWay project trains dialysis center teams to conduct ACP conversations with patients with kidney failure. Emphasis is on training and supporting the dialysis center social worker to be the team leader for ACP, in collaboration with the nephrologist and other clinicians.
Aims:
- Implement the HIGHway intervention with a project team consisting of a social worker, nephrologist and nurse at 50 clinics, and train them to conduct ACP using best practices.
- Assist social workers/nurses to implement ACP into their regular workflow with personal coaching, webinars and multimedia teaching materials.
- Use a dedicated web-based application software to guide social workers/nurses on the ACP process of patients in dialysis centers and provide resources for holding ACP conversations.
- Provide ongoing coaching through monthly teleconferences to bolster social worker/nurse skills through case discussion and mentoring.
- Develop a long-term implementation and scale-up plan for training social workers/nurses in ACP in different dialysis centers in conjunction with the Coalition for Supportive Care of Kidney Patients, Forum of ESRD Networks, the National Council of Nephrology Social Workers, the National Renal Administrators Association, and dialysis organizations.
RELEVANT BACKGROUND Patient-centered care problem addressed: Patients on dialysis want to discuss their preferences for treatment at the end of life, but few do so, and most nephrologists are reluctant or feel unprepared to lead such discussions. Effective tools are critically needed to elicit such preferences since over 50,000 Americans die of kidney disease annually, more than from breast or prostate cancer. For dialysis patients with significant co-morbidities, risk of death within a year of starting dialysis is stark. Of those who had 4 or more comorbidities, 26% died within 30 days of dialysis initiation, and 60% died within a year. These patients have higher - and often unwanted - intensity of care at end of life; in a four-year study of the United States Renal Data System, 49% of elderly long-term hemodialysis (HD) patients spent time in an intensive care unit in their final month of life, compared with 24% of cancer patients. Meaningful end-of-life conversations can change these outcomes and are associated with increased hospice referral, less aggressive and expensive medical treatment, and higher levels of family satisfaction. Yet less than 10% of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients report having a conversation about any end-of-life issues with their nephrologist in the previous year, although 90% said such conversations were important. Few patients with ESRD engage in ACP, and the vast majority lack a written advance directive or surrogate decision maker, leaving them unprepared to provide guidance in medical decisions in a crisis.
A prior study funded by PCORI developed and tested an intervention to enable more advance care planning to take place in dialysis centers. The Shared Decision Making - Renal Supportive Care (SDM-RSC) study tested a multi-modal patient-centered intervention to improve advance care planning for dialysis patients. Through qualitative interviews with advisory boards comprised of patients and stakeholders, SDM-RSC investigators designed an intervention that focused on goals of care conversations between patients and family members with the nephrologist and social worker. The SDM-RSC intervention targeted deficiencies in communication, estimating prognosis, and transition planning for seriously ill dialysis patients. The intervention showed capacity to increase substantially completion of advance directives and medical orders (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment [MOLST]/Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment [POLST]) associated with improved patient-level end-of-life (EOL) outcomes. Among study participants, the advance directive completion rate and understanding of advance directives were substantially higher than in usual care; 75% of participants named and documented a healthcare proxy and 63% had medical orders (MOLST or POLST) (in comparison to 49% with advance directives and 3% with medical orders in usual care). The average duration time for an ACP conversation was about 45 minutes. Overall clinic-level hospice usage using retrospective data did not vary significantly between the pre- and post-intervention 6-month periods with an observed average rate of 25% which is close to the 2015 national average of 26% among all ESRD Medicare decedents. However, among deceased study participants who engaged in a Shared Decision Making and Renal Supportive Care (SDMRSC) meeting, 48% voluntarily withdrew from dialysis prior to death and 39% received hospice services (compared to the overall rate in these dialysis centers of 24.8%).
There were high levels of family satisfaction (FAMCARE results) and no adverse intervention effects on patients or surrogates on measures of depression and health-related quality of life. The stakeholder advisory council and the respondents on post-intervention interviews recommended the following: a) streamlining and focusing the social worker training; b) offering the advance care planning conversation to all dialysis patients, not just those who were seriously ill, c) broadening the population to include home dialysis patients; and d) offering a telehealth option for conducting the discussions.
The current study builds on the SDM-RSC results to implement the revised intervention in a broader population with a larger number of participating dialysis centers.
- Conditions
- Kidney Diseases, Kidney Failure
- Being tested
- Training
- Keywords
- advance care planning, social workers, implementation research, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, nurses
- Medical subject headings
- Kidney Diseases, Renal Insufficiency
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
TrainingOther
Social workers/nurses participants are agreeing to participating in the training program (3 sessions of 2 hours over a period of six weeks - one session every 2 weeks), follow up training sessions (occurring monthly), mentorship calls with social worker faculty on the project team, recording one conversation between social worker and a patient for quality improvement purposes, and completing evaluation of the project interventions (5-minute questionnaire after each education session, 15-minute questionnaire at end of participation in project).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Population 1: Social workers/Nurses | Social workers and nurses working at participating dialysis centers. Dialysis centers will be selected based on demographic data of the center (urbanicity, population served, size of center, patients treated, etc) to provide for diversity of centers participating. Receives: Other: Training | |
| Population 2a: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center | 2a. When an advance care planning conversation takes place, social worker/nurse will provide patient with an informational flyer about the HIGHway project and a postcard. | |
| Population 2b: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center | 2b. Social worker/nurse will identify one patient willing to have a recording made of advance care planning conversation between social worker/nurse and patient. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Advance care conversations attempted, held, documented
Patient/Provider Outcome: Self-report of number of conversations social worker has with dialysis patients Self -report of number of conversations social worker has with dialysis patients.
Measured: During the implementation of the project, one report, year 1
Fidelity of ACP conversations per the HIGHway process taught in trainings
Each social worker will record one ACP conversation with a patient and be assessed on their fidelity to the ACP conversation checklist
Measured: Through implementation completion, one in year 1
Relevance and Significance of ACP intervention for patients
Survey given to patients after an ACP conversation to assess relevance and significance of the conversation to their care
Measured: Through implementation completion, one in year 1
Secondary outcomes (4)
Implementation Outcome: Appropriateness
The perceived fit, relevance, or compatibility of the innovation for a given practice setting, provider, or consumer; to address an issue
Measured: After finish implementation, one time, year 1
Implementation Outcome: Acceptability
Perception that a given treatment, service, practice, or innovation is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory.
Measured: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
Characteristics of HIGHway Approach
Perceived usefulness of each element of HIGHway
Measured: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
Feasibility of HIGHway
The extent to which HIGHway was successfully used or carried out
Measured: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 Apr 2022
- Study start1 Sep 2021
- Primary completion31 May 2024
- Study completion31 Jul 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Kidney DiseasesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by George Washington UniversityThe 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 55 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- George Washington University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Western Carolina University, University of New Mexico
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Dale Lupu, PhD, Principal investigator, George Washington University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05324878
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NCR213481
- Other IDs
- DI-2020C2-20362
- Acronym
- HIGHway
- Status last verified
- Nov 2024
- First submitted
- 11 Mar 2022
- Last updated
- 20 Nov 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Rodriguez de Sosa GM, Thamer M, Anderson E, Unruh ML, Lupu DE. Patient-Centered Advance Care Planning in Dialysis: The HIGHWay (Honor Individual Goals and Hopes Way) Initiative. Kidney360. 2025 Apr 25;6(6):957-967. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000000767.
PubMed 40279178Rodriguez de Sosa G, Nicklas A, Thamer M, Anderson E, Reddy N, Stevelos J, Germain MJ, Unruh ML, Lupu DE. Implementing Advance Care Planning for dialysis patients: HIGHway project. BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Jul 16;21(1):129. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-01011-5.
PubMed 35841019
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Nov 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- HIGHway Project: Honoring Individual Goals and Hopes: Implementing Advance Care Planning for Persons With Kidney Disease on Dialysis
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05324878
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HIGHway / NCR213481
- Conditions
- Kidney Diseases, Kidney Failure
- Keywords
- advance care planning, social workers, implementation research, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, nurses
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 55 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- George Washington UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Western Carolina University, University of New Mexico
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 May 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jul 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 Apr 2022 (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.
The PCORI HIGHway project name embodies its goal: the way to "Honor Individuals Goals and Hopes". HIGHway trains and supports dialysis center social workers and nurses to communicate with their patients about their hopes and goals for their future care plans. This process, known as advance care planning (ACP), helps relieve patient concerns about the future, lays the foundation for better goal-concordant care at the end of life, and fosters deeper connection between patient and the dialysis care team. The HIGHway project will provide training and ongoing coaching to social workers and other change team members at 50-60 dialysis centers throughout the US. The goal is to integrate advance care planning conversations between dialysis patients and their health care team into the ongoing workflow of dialysis centers. The project is funded by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), a non-profit organization chartered by Congress to fund projects to promote patient-centered care.
Detailed description
OBJECTIVES Primary Objective: The HIGHWay project trains dialysis center teams to conduct ACP conversations with patients with kidney failure. Emphasis is on training and supporting the dialysis center social worker to be the team leader for ACP, in collaboration with the nephrologist and other clinicians.
Aims:
- Implement the HIGHway intervention with a project team consisting of a social worker, nephrologist and nurse at 50 clinics, and train them to conduct ACP using best practices.
- Assist social workers/nurses to implement ACP into their regular workflow with personal coaching, webinars and multimedia teaching materials.
- Use a dedicated web-based application software to guide social workers/nurses on the ACP process of patients in dialysis centers and provide resources for holding ACP conversations.
- Provide ongoing coaching through monthly teleconferences to bolster social worker/nurse skills through case discussion and mentoring.
- Develop a long-term implementation and scale-up plan for training social workers/nurses in ACP in different dialysis centers in conjunction with the Coalition for Supportive Care of Kidney Patients, Forum of ESRD Networks, the National Council of Nephrology Social Workers, the National Renal Administrators Association, and dialysis organizations.
RELEVANT BACKGROUND Patient-centered care problem addressed: Patients on dialysis want to discuss their preferences for treatment at the end of life, but few do so, and most nephrologists are reluctant or feel unprepared to lead such discussions. Effective tools are critically needed to elicit such preferences since over 50,000 Americans die of kidney disease annually, more than from breast or prostate cancer. For dialysis patients with significant co-morbidities, risk of death within a year of starting dialysis is stark. Of those who had 4 or more comorbidities, 26% died within 30 days of dialysis initiation, and 60% died within a year. These patients have higher - and often unwanted - intensity of care at end of life; in a four-year study of the United States Renal Data System, 49% of elderly long-term hemodialysis (HD) patients spent time in an intensive care unit in their final month of life, compared with 24% of cancer patients. Meaningful end-of-life conversations can change these outcomes and are associated with increased hospice referral, less aggressive and expensive medical treatment, and higher levels of family satisfaction. Yet less than 10% of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients report having a conversation about any end-of-life issues with their nephrologist in the previous year, although 90% said such conversations were important. Few patients with ESRD engage in ACP, and the vast majority lack a written advance directive or surrogate decision maker, leaving them unprepared to provide guidance in medical decisions in a crisis.
A prior study funded by PCORI developed and tested an intervention to enable more advance care planning to take place in dialysis centers. The Shared Decision Making - Renal Supportive Care (SDM-RSC) study tested a multi-modal patient-centered intervention to improve advance care planning for dialysis patients. Through qualitative interviews with advisory boards comprised of patients and stakeholders, SDM-RSC investigators designed an intervention that focused on goals of care conversations between patients and family members with the nephrologist and social worker. The SDM-RSC intervention targeted deficiencies in communication, estimating prognosis, and transition planning for seriously ill dialysis patients. The intervention showed capacity to increase substantially completion of advance directives and medical orders (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment [MOLST]/Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment [POLST]) associated with improved patient-level end-of-life (EOL) outcomes. Among study participants, the advance directive completion rate and understanding of advance directives were substantially higher than in usual care; 75% of participants named and documented a healthcare proxy and 63% had medical orders (MOLST or POLST) (in comparison to 49% with advance directives and 3% with medical orders in usual care). The average duration time for an ACP conversation was about 45 minutes. Overall clinic-level hospice usage using retrospective data did not vary significantly between the pre- and post-intervention 6-month periods with an observed average rate of 25% which is close to the 2015 national average of 26% among all ESRD Medicare decedents. However, among deceased study participants who engaged in a Shared Decision Making and Renal Supportive Care (SDMRSC) meeting, 48% voluntarily withdrew from dialysis prior to death and 39% received hospice services (compared to the overall rate in these dialysis centers of 24.8%).
There were high levels of family satisfaction (FAMCARE results) and no adverse intervention effects on patients or surrogates on measures of depression and health-related quality of life. The stakeholder advisory council and the respondents on post-intervention interviews recommended the following: a) streamlining and focusing the social worker training; b) offering the advance care planning conversation to all dialysis patients, not just those who were seriously ill, c) broadening the population to include home dialysis patients; and d) offering a telehealth option for conducting the discussions.
The current study builds on the SDM-RSC results to implement the revised intervention in a broader population with a larger number of participating dialysis centers.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Population 1: Social workers/Nurses | – | Other: TrainingSocial workers and nurses working at participating dialysis centers. Dialysis centers will be selected based on demographic data of the center (urbanicity, population served, size of center, patients treated, etc) to provide for diversity of centers participating. |
| Population 2a: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center | – | –2a. When an advance care planning conversation takes place, social worker/nurse will provide patient with an informational flyer about the HIGHway project and a postcard. |
| Population 2b: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center | – | –2b. Social worker/nurse will identify one patient willing to have a recording made of advance care planning conversation between social worker/nurse and patient. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- There are three separate study populations for this study, with procedures and instruments specific to the population Population 1: Social workers/nurses and dialysis centers will be selected based on demographic data of the center (urbanicity, population served, size of center, patients treated, etc) to provide for diversity of centers participating. Population 2: Patients receiving care at the dialysis center where participating social worker/nurses works. 2a. When an advance care planning conversation takes place, social worker/nurse will provide patient with an informational flyer about the HIGHway project and a postcard. 2b. Social worker/nurse will identify one patient willing to have a recording made of advance care planning conversation between social worker/nurse and patient.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Social worker or nurse must work at a participating dialysis center.
- Social worker, nurse and patients must speak, read and write English.
- All participants must be 18 y old.
- Social workers and nurses Commitment to attend initial 6-h training and booster sessions.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Under 18 years old
- Unable to speak, read and write English
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 |
|---|---|---|
| TrainingSocial workers/nurses participants are agreeing to participating in the training program (3 sessions of 2 hours over a period of six weeks - one session every 2 weeks), follow up training sessions (occurring monthly), mentorship calls with social worker faculty on the project team, recording one conversation between social worker and a patient for quality improvement purposes, and completing evaluation of the project interventions (5-minute questionnaire after each education session, 15-minute questionnaire at end of participation in project). | Other | Population 1: Social workers/Nurses |
Primary outcome
Advance care conversations attempted, held, documented
Time frame: During the implementation of the project, one report, year 1
Patient/Provider Outcome: Self-report of number of conversations social worker has with dialysis patients Self -report of number of conversations social worker has with dialysis patients.
Fidelity of ACP conversations per the HIGHway process taught in trainings
Time frame: Through implementation completion, one in year 1
Each social worker will record one ACP conversation with a patient and be assessed on their fidelity to the ACP conversation checklist
Relevance and Significance of ACP intervention for patients
Time frame: Through implementation completion, one in year 1
Survey given to patients after an ACP conversation to assess relevance and significance of the conversation to their care
4 secondary outcomes
Implementation Outcome: Appropriateness
Time frame: After finish implementation, one time, year 1
Implementation Outcome: Acceptability
Time frame: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
Characteristics of HIGHway Approach
Time frame: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
Feasibility of HIGHway
Time frame: Immediately after finish implementation, one in year 1
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 20 Nov 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40279178Rodriguez de Sosa GM, Thamer M, Anderson E, Unruh ML, Lupu DE. Patient-Centered Advance Care Planning in Dialysis: The HIGHWay (Honor Individual Goals and Hopes Way) Initiative. Kidney360. 2025 Apr 25;6(6):957-967. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000000767.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35841019Rodriguez de Sosa G, Nicklas A, Thamer M, Anderson E, Reddy N, Stevelos J, Germain MJ, Unruh ML, Lupu DE. Implementing Advance Care Planning for dialysis patients: HIGHway project. BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Jul 16;21(1):129. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-01011-5.
- PCORI Website Project PageLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Kidney Diseases
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Population Pharmacokinetics of Temocillin in Acute Enterobacterial Pyelonephritis in Children
Pyelonephritis
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study of Belzutifan (MK-6482) in Combination With Lenvatinib Versus Cabozantinib for Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma (MK-6482-011)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell
Enrolling by invitation
Online Exercise Program for Transplant Patients: A Pilot Study
Kidney Transplantation, Physical Function
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Safety and Efficacy of Empagliflozin in Hemodialysis
End Stage Renal Disease
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.
Dale Lupu, PhD principal investigator
George Washington University
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Kidney Diseases and Kidney Failure, run by George Washington University 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 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 20 Nov 2024. 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?
Advance care conversations attempted, held, documented (time frame: During the implementation of the project, one report, year 1). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT05324878, which also lists 2 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 20 Nov 2024.