PrOVE QUERI Project #1

December 6, 2024 updated by: VA Office of Research and Development

Implementing Guidelines for Shared Decision Making in Lung Cancer Screening (QUE 15-286)

The overall goal of this project is to test two strategies for implementing a shared decision making tool to be used by providers while talking to patients about lung cancer screening. Eight participating sites will be randomized to compare standard implementation with intensive implementation. Additionally, the investigators will determine the factors that were most important for successful implementation of the shared decision making tool. Finally, the investigators will survey patients to evaluate the effects of Decision Precision on patient's knowledge of the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening, the quality of their decision making, and their satisfaction with care.

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

The overall goal of this quality improvement project is to test two strategies for implementing shared decision making, which incorporates the Decision Precision lung cancer screening tool. The investigators will use multi-site, cluster-based randomization to compare standard implementation with intensive implementation. Additionally, the investigators will determine the factors that were most important for successful implementation of the shared decision making tool. Finally, the investigators will have a human subjects research component to evaluate the effects of Decision Precision on patient's knowledge of the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening, the quality of their decision making, and their satisfaction with 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.
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.
17033

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
    • Michigan
      • Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States, 48105
        • VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI
    • Minnesota
      • Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55417
        • Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10010
        • Manhattan Campus of the VA NY Harbor Healthcare System, New York, NY
    • North Carolina
      • Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27705
        • Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
    • Ohio
      • Cincinnati, Ohio, United States, 45220
        • Cincinnati VA Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH
    • Oregon
      • Portland, Oregon, United States, 97239
        • VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, OR
    • Rhode Island
      • Providence, Rhode Island, United States, 02908
        • Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI
    • South Carolina
      • Charleston, South Carolina, United States, 29401-5799
        • Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC

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

55 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients at participating sites, age 55 to 80 years, who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients at participating sites without documented exclusions for lung cancer screening who have had initial lung cancer screening clinical reminders resolved during the recruitment period

Exclusion Criteria:

Exclusions for initial lung cancer screening clinical reminders:

  • history of lung, pancreatic, liver or esophageal cancer
  • a health factor on file indicating they have a life expectancy of less than 6 months or who already had a chest CT in the past 12 months

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

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
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.
standard implementation
Webinar, Promotion, Tool Access, academic detailing + Audit and Feedback
Other: Webinar, Promotion, and Tool Access
All sites will receive a professionally developed, 15-minute webinar that describes the tool's development (e.g., how the algorithm was designed) and a tutorial on how to use the web-site. The investigators will promote the webinar and using the tool through key local leaders. A web-link to use the tool will be placed within the lung cancer screening clinical reminder.
Other: Audit and Feedback
Providers at all sites will have access to this system. It will provide feedback on the screening and shared decision making process (e.g., number of provider's eligible patients screened for lung cancer, use of the tool, patient knowledge and satisfaction from patient surveys).
Other Names:
  • A&F
Other: Academic Detailing
All sites will be offered an academic detailing approach to implementation of Lung Decision Precision. A trained detailer will travel to all sites who agree to a visit. The detailer will meet with individual primary care providers whenever possible, and groups of providers as necessary. He will present evidence for a risk-based approach to screening and how to use the tool with patients to make tailored screening recommendations.
Other Names:
  • AD
intensive implementation
Webinar, Promotion, and Tool Access, academic detailing + Audit and Feedback + LEAP
Other: Webinar, Promotion, and Tool Access
All sites will receive a professionally developed, 15-minute webinar that describes the tool's development (e.g., how the algorithm was designed) and a tutorial on how to use the web-site. The investigators will promote the webinar and using the tool through key local leaders. A web-link to use the tool will be placed within the lung cancer screening clinical reminder.
Other: Audit and Feedback
Providers at all sites will have access to this system. It will provide feedback on the screening and shared decision making process (e.g., number of provider's eligible patients screened for lung cancer, use of the tool, patient knowledge and satisfaction from patient surveys).
Other Names:
  • A&F
Other: LEAP
Sites randomized to intensive implementation will be offered participation in the LEAP program. LEAP (Learn. Engage. Act. Program) is a multi-week, online learning collaborative using systems redesign techniques to help sites identify and overcome barriers to implementation of shared decision making (use of the Decision Precision tool).
Other: Academic Detailing
All sites will be offered an academic detailing approach to implementation of Lung Decision Precision. A trained detailer will travel to all sites who agree to a visit. The detailer will meet with individual primary care providers whenever possible, and groups of providers as necessary. He will present evidence for a risk-based approach to screening and how to use the tool with patients to make tailored screening recommendations.
Other Names:
  • AD

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
Odds Ratio of the Interaction Between Lung Cancer Risk and Implementation Arm
Time Frame: post implementation, an average of 15 months
First, we estimated screening's net benefit for an individual based on their baseline lung cancer risk, as estimated using the Bach et. al. annual lung cancer incidence model. Patients are considered "high benefit" if their annual lung cancer risk is between 0.3%-1.3%. Patients outside this range are considered "preference sensitive". We fit a multilevel logistic regression model where receipt of screening is the outcome. Precision decision making is reflected in the association between baseline lung cancer risk and screening utilization: an increase in screening utilization for those at higher lung cancer risk indicates some degree of precision decision making. The primary outcome for the cluster-randomized design assesses the difference in precision decision making in the standard vs. intensive implementation arms. This is estimated as the effect on screening receipt of the interaction between risk and implementation arm.
post implementation, an average of 15 months
Patient Satisfaction With Decision and Process
Time Frame: Survey mailed to Veteran several weeks after identified as having an initial discussion about lung cancer screening using VA administrative data
Obtained from patient surveys (for the subset of the overall participants who returned surveys). The unit of measurement is one unit on the scale [scale of 0 (very poor) to 10 (very good)].
Survey mailed to Veteran several weeks after identified as having an initial discussion about lung cancer screening using VA administrative data

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
Number of Tool Assessments Where Patient Decision Aid Was Printed
Time Frame: post implementation, up to 25 months
Number of times during study duration where patient decision aid was printed from the Lung Decision Precision web-site.
post implementation, up to 25 months
Number of Times Dynamic Pictograph Depicting Personalized Benefit and Harm Was Opened for Display
Time Frame: post implementation, up to 25 months
Number of times dynamic pictograph depicting personalized benefit and harm was opened for display in the Lung Decision Precision web-site during the study period, collected as para data from Decision Precision web-site
post implementation, up to 25 months
Formative Evaluation to Determine the Factors Most Important for Successful Implementation of Decision Precision Tool
Time Frame: At least one year post-implementation of Lung Decision Precision web-site
Qualitative analysts will conduct telephone interviews with providers at each site who identify themselves as participating in shared decision making process with patients regarding lung cancer screening. Reporting for this report is number of interviews completed of number interviews requested.
At least one year post-implementation of Lung Decision Precision web-site

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: Tanner Caverly, MD MPH, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI

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.
November 15, 2016

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.
March 10, 2020

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.
May 31, 2020

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).
May 5, 2016

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.
May 5, 2016

First Posted (Estimated)

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.
May 6, 2016

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.
March 25, 2025

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.
December 6, 2024

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.
December 1, 2024

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.
  • QUX 16-003
  • QUE 15-286 (Other Grant/Funding Number: HSR&D QUERI)

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