Intervening to Prevent Contextual Errors in Medical Decision Making

April 6, 2015 updated by: US Department of Veterans Affairs
This study assessed whether a medical education intervention improves the quality of medical decision making in the care of patients with complex psychosocial -- or contextual -- needs that are essential to address when planning their care. A group of internal medicine residents were randomly assigned to participate in the seminar and practicum and then they, along with a control group that had not participated, were assessed for the quality of their clinical decision making and its impact on patient care. The study also assessed whether contextualization of care is associated with better patient health care outcomes

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

We enrolled 139 internal medicine residents at 2 VA hospitals, Jesse Brown and Hines, in a randomized controlled design. Half participated in a 4 hour seminar series integrated into their ambulatory curriculum. Each month a total of 8 residents participated. Following the intervention there were 3 levels of assessment: (1) All participants, intervention and control, participated in a brief exercise interviewing 4 standardized patients (SPs). Note that we separately enlisted the assistance of 8 attending physicians to assist with case development for these SPs. (2) The research team subsequently enrolled 3 real patients from each physician's practice with "red flags" such as poor adherence, or missed visits, suggestive of contextual issues that need to be addressed. Physicians were scored on their performance at identifying the underlying contextual factors that account for these red flags and on formulating an appropriate plan of care. (3) The coders prospectively defined successful vs. unsuccessful outcomes for each case. At the follow up visit data was collected on whether the desired outcome was achieved. The analysis compared the skills, performance and outcomes of the intervention compared with the control group to determine the efficacy of training residents to individualize care.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
138

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60612
        • Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • ADULT
  • OLDER_ADULT
  • CHILD

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Internal Medicine Residency with continuity of care clinics at either Jesse Brown or Hines VA Medical Centers

Exclusion Criteria:

  • All resident physicians who do not meet inclusion criteria

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: SINGLE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
EXPERIMENTAL: Seminar and Practicum
Seminar and practicum that occurs over 4 week period for internal medicine residents, designed to provide a systematic approach to identifying and addressing contextual factors essential to planning patient care.
Behavioral: Seminar and Practicum
A 4 hour seminar and practicum for internal medicine residents designed to provide a systematic approach to identifying contextual factors essential to planning patient care.
NO_INTERVENTION: No intervention
No educational intervention.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Health Outcome Improvement Rate
Time Frame: After 9 months of the recorded visit
A target health outcome improvement for each patient is prospectively defined at the first visit in which a contextual red flag is noted. The study outcome is what proportion of a physician's patients achieve their target health outcome improvement as documented in the medical record at 9 months post first visit.
After 9 months of the recorded visit

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Rate of Contextual Probing
Time Frame: During initial patient recordings
Proportion of encounters in which physician probed contextual red flags expressed by patients and identified via audio recordings.
During initial patient recordings
Rate of Contextual Planning
Time Frame: During initial patient recordings
Proportion of patient encounters in which the physician's plan of care addressed contextual factors identified in the audio recordings
During initial patient recordings

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
US Department of Veterans Affairs

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Saul J. Weiner, MD, Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
October 1, 2009

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
November 1, 2012

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
December 1, 2012

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
March 3, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 4, 2009

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 5, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
April 24, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
April 6, 2015

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
October 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • EDU 08-430

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings