Reducing VA No-Shows: Evaluation of Predictive Overbooking Applied to Colonoscopy (No-show)

March 13, 2018 updated by: VA Office of Research and Development
In this research study, investigators use colonoscopy as a case example to evaluate a predictive overbooking model derived using patient-level predictors of absenteeism. The no-show overbooking intervention employs a logistic regression model that uses patient data to predict the odds of no-showing with 80% accuracy. These projected no-show appointments will be overbooked by clerks for patients who agree to join a "fast track" short-call line. By rapidly processing endoscopy patients and moving them out of traditional slots, investigators predict more scheduling slots would become available for patients awaiting colonoscopy.

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

Patient "no-shows" are especially common in VA gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy units, where both open-access endoscopy scheduling and patient dislike of procedures contribute to high absenteeism. In this proposal, investigators use endoscopy as a case example to evaluate a predictive overbooking model derived using patient-level predictors of absenteeism. The no-show overbooking intervention employs a logistic regression model that uses patient data to predict the odds of no-showing with 80% accuracy. These projected no-show appointments will be overbooked by clerks for patients who agree to join a "fast track" short-call line. However, patients scheduled for upper endoscopies in the "fast track" assume a small risk of service denial on the day of their overbooking in case of inaccurate predictions. If this occurs, the patient is guaranteed service in the next available position and is assured of having a shorter wait time. Patients scheduled for colonoscopies will never be turned down but may experience delays in the waiting room the day of their "fast track" appointment. By rapidly processing endoscopy patients and moving them out of traditional slots, investigators predict more scheduling slots would become available for patients awaiting colonoscopy. Investigators propose to conduct a prospective, 24-month, interrupted time series (ITS) trial in the WLAVA (West Los Angeles Veterans Administration) GI clinic endoscopy unit. During intervention periods, investigators will activate the no-show predictive overbooking strategy described above. Investigators will compare outcomes between scheduling strategies, including differences in percent utilization of capacity (primary outcome), number of Veterans served, mean patient lag time between scheduling and procedure, number of unexpected service denials ("bumps") from no-show predictive overbooking, and direct costs of care. Investigators will analyze differences using both traditional univariate and multivariate approaches, and using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) analyses to adjust for auto-correlations in ITS data.

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.
180

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
    • California
      • West Los Angeles, California, United States, 90073
        • VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, West Los Angeles, CA

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

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who are scheduled for upper endoscopy and agree to the terms of "fast track" offer.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • If a patient expresses concern about service denial, confusion about the bargain, or refuses to participate, the investigators will schedule these patients routinely.

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 Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

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: Fast-tracked
'Predictive no-show overbooking' intervention. Patients who volunteer to enroll in "fast-track" line, which gives them an opportunity to overbook their appointment for endoscopy earlier in a predictive no-show slots.
Other: Predictive no-show overbooking
During intervention period, every Veteran scheduled for an endoscopy will be offered "fast-track" offer, which gives them a chance to get their endoscopy procedure done earlier than usual scheduling by overbooking their appointment in a predictive no-show slot.
No Intervention: Control
Patients who are scheduled routinely

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
Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity Filled
Time Frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic
Investigators' primary objective will be to evaluate the impact of no-show predictive overbooking on percentage of the GI endoscopy clinic that are filled on a given day. Days where at least one Fast-tracked patient attended an appointment were compared to days where only Control patients attended appointments. Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity is calculated as the number of appointments completed divided by number of appointment spots available on a given day. This percentage was compared between Fast-tracked days and Control days, using data from 1672 patients.
After 12 months of running study in clinic

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
Scheduling-to-procedure Lag Time
Time Frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic
The investigators will calculate the mean daily lag time for all colonoscopy and upper endoscopies performed per day
After 12 months of running study in clinic
Daily Service Denials ("Bumps")
Time Frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic
The investigators will compare the number of patients bumped per day between scheduling approaches
After 12 months of running study in clinic
Advanced Adenoma Detection/Cecal Intubation Rates
Time Frame: After 20 months of running study in clinic
The investigators will compare daily advanced adenomatous polyp detection and daily cecal intubation rates between groups.
After 20 months of running study in clinic
Length of Workday
Time Frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic
Length of Workday in hours (comparing days with Fast-Tracked Appointments to Control days without)
After 12 months of running study in clinic
Cost Comparisons
Time Frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic
For cost comparisons, the investigators will aggregate total provider overtime costs for colonoscopies performed. Cost is reported per day.
After 12 months of running study in clinic

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.
VA Office of Research and Development

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: Paul G. Shekelle, MD PhD MPH, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, West Los Angeles, CA

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 (Actual)

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.
July 8, 2013

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.
July 6, 2015

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.
June 30, 2016

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).
July 9, 2012

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.
July 9, 2012

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.
July 12, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

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 12, 2018

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.
March 13, 2018

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.
March 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

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.
  • IIR 12-055
  • 1I01HX000878-01 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

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