Implementation and Evaluation of Hospital-to-Home Transitional Care Intervention in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure
Implementation Ond Evaluation of Hospital-to-Home Transitional Care Intervention in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Henan
-
Kaifeng, Henan, China, 475004
- Institute of Nursing and Health, School of Nursing and Health, Henan University
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- It meets the diagnostic criteria of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) for CHF, and the heart function level is II to III;
- Age ≥18 years old;
- The condition is stable and meets the standard of being discharged from the hospital;
- Clear consciousness, no communication barriers, able to understand and fill in the questionnaire correctly;
- Informed consent and voluntary participation in this study.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with hepato-renal disfunction, sequelae of stroke, dementia;
- Patients with a history of mental disorders or already having mental disorders, critically ill patients.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
No Intervention: control group
The control group received routine care.
|
|
|
Experimental: Intervention group
The intervention group received a transitional care intervention mainly focused on the transitional care model (TCM).
|
The intervention group received a transitional care intervention mainly focused on the transitional care model (TCM).
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Self-efficacy management indicators
Time Frame: Baseline, one month, three months
|
The measurement tool adopts the Chronic Disease Self-Efficacy Questionnaire compiled by Stanford University in the United States.The scoring consists of two dimensions: symptom management and disease-commonality management.
The self-efficacy score for symptom management is calculated by averaging items 1, 2, 3, and 4 (if two or more items are missing or omitted, the variable is considered missing).
A higher score indicates greater self-efficacy in symptom management.
The self-efficacy score for disease-commonality management is obtained by averaging items 5 and 6.
The score ranges from 1 to 5, a higher score indicates higher self-efficacy in disease-commonality management.
|
Baseline, one month, three months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Self-care indicators
Time Frame: Baseline, one month, three months
|
In this study, the Chinese version of the self-care ability scale for elderly, translated by Guo , was used.
The scale demonstrates good reliability and validity, with a Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.82, a test-retest reliability of 0.82, and a content validity index of 0.94.
The scale consists of 17 items and is applicable to all older adults.
Scoring on the scale ranges from "completely disagree" to "completely agree," with scores ranging from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate a higher self-care ability in older adults.
|
Baseline, one month, three months
|
|
Disease-related indicators
Time Frame: Baseline, one month, three months
|
Disease-related indicators are the indicators of frequent examination of patients with heart failure in the hospital: The blood test index adopts NT-proBNP as a measurement indicator, which is an independent risk factor for the death and re-admission of patients with heart failure.
Due to structure and metabolism, NT-pro BNP has the advantages of long half-life (120min), high blood concentration, low individual variability rate, good in vitro stability, not limited by specimen collection conditions and the influence of specimen type (plasma or serum).
NT-pro BNP testing on patients can help assess long-term risks.
Repeated determination will provide more prognostic information for patients.
|
Baseline, one month, three months
|
|
Transitional nursing evaluation indicators
Time Frame: Baseline, one month, three months
|
This study adopts the Care Transitions Measure (CTM-15) developed by American scholar COLEMAN in 2002.
This scale is a self-assessment scale that evaluates transitional care from the patient's perspective, including information transmission ( 6 items), patient participation (3 entries), management preparation (4 entries), nursing plan (2 entries) 4 dimensions, a total of 15 entries.
The results show that the total scale Cronbach's α coefficient is 0.93, and the content validity index is 0.99, which has good credibility.
The scores of each item: "very disagree", "disagree", "agree" and "very agree" are 1~4 points respectively, and the final score is converted to 0~100 points.
The higher the score, indicating that the research subjects are satisfied with the transitional nursing services.
|
Baseline, one month, three months
|
Other Outcome Measures
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Re-hospitalisation indicators
Time Frame: Baseline, one month, three months
|
The study mainly measures the re-hospitalisation of the study subjects and whether the re-hospitalisation rate of the two groups has changed.
By counting the re-admission of the study subjects, the re-admission rate of the two groups is calculated, which is mainly collected through the combination of the hospital's HIS system inquiry and asking patients or family members.
HIS's scoring adopts the method of multi-dimensional evaluation.
Each dimension contains multiple items, and each item has a corresponding scoring standard.
The scoring generally adopts the five-level method, from 0 to 4 points, indicating no impact, mild impact, moderate impact, severe impact and very serious impact respectively.
|
Baseline, one month, three months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- HUSOM2021-289
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
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.