Transforming PCI Informed Consent Into an Evidence-based Decision-making Tool (PRISM)

September 7, 2012 updated by: Saint Luke's Health System
Using individualized patient estimates of procedural risks and benefits, this project will transform the process of informed consent for coronary angioplasty into a dynamic educational tool for patients and physicians and is a direct response to the Institute of Medicine's call for a more evidence-based, efficient, patient-centered healthcare system. It is hypothesized that patients will develop a greater understanding of their individual risks and benefits from PCI, will be empowered to more actively engage in shared decision-making, as well as have improved awareness of their responsibility to adhere to dual anti-platelet therapy if treated with a drug eluting stent (risks for target vessel revascularization with bare metal and drug eluting stents are also provided in the new consent form). It is also anticipated that physicians, in turn, will use these individualized estimates to better discriminate between risks and benefits among different bleeding avoidance therapies so as to improve the safety and cost-effectiveness of PCI.

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.

Detailed Description

This study will test the impact of a new mechanism for eliciting informed consent from patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on 1) patients' comprehension of procedural risks/benefits and participation in shared decision-making; and 2) upon clinicians' use of effective strategies to minimize the risk of bleeding at the time of PCI. To facilitate these goals, we will prospectively provide each patients' risks for bleeding at the time that the informed consent document is generated. This will be accomplished by transforming the infrastructure of the informed consent process at participating study centers using a novel, web-based system - the Personalized Risk Information Services Manager (PRISM) - to generate individualized consent forms with estimates of risks and outcomes using validated multivariable models from the American College of Cardiology's NCDR. The goals of this study are to 1) identify barriers in implementing individualized consent forms in clinical care and to test whether this novel consent process 2) improves the quality of the informed consent process, 3) supports the more rational use of Bleeding Avoidance Therapies (BATs), 4) reduces bleeding events after PCI, and 5) supports a more cost-effective PCI procedure. This will be done using a pre-post design at 6 enrolling hospitals and comparing changes in practice with contemporaneous controls matched from the broader NCDR Cath/PCI registry.

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.
Observational

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.
1399

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
    • California
      • Oakland, California, United States, 94612
        • Kaiser Permanente
    • Illinois
      • Springfield, Illinois, United States, 62701
        • Prairie Education And Research Cooperative
    • Massachusetts
      • Springfield, Massachusetts, United States, 01199
        • Baystate Medical Center
    • Michigan
      • Detroit, Michigan, United States, 48202
        • Henry Ford Health System
    • Missouri
      • Kansas City, Missouri, United States, 64111
        • Saint Luke's Hospital of Kansas City
      • St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63130
        • Barnes-Jewish Hospital/Washington University School of Medicine
    • Texas
      • Plano, Texas, United States, 75204
        • Baylor Research Institute

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

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Cardiac patients undergoing a non-emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure for their heart disease.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • All patients receiving a PCI in a participating institution

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previously enrolled in the PRISM
  • Does not speak English or Spanish
  • Dementia
  • Too ill to interview
  • Current prisoner

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

  • Observational Models: Cohort
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

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.
Saint Luke's Health System

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Washington University School of Medicine
Henry Ford Health System
Kaiser Permanente
Baylor Research Institute
Baystate Medical Center
Prairie Education and Research Cooperative

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.
September 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.
October 1, 2011

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.
September 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).
June 27, 2011

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.
June 27, 2011

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.
June 28, 2011

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.
September 10, 2012

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.
September 7, 2012

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.
June 1, 2011

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.
  • R01HL096624 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

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