Comprehensive Informatics Framework for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Dissemination (iADAPT)

May 14, 2020 updated by: Johns Hopkins University

In this project the investigators seek to utilize our experience for developing a comprehensive informatics framework for rapid adaptation and dissemination of Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) products tailored to different categories of health consumers including difficult-to-reach patients. Based on our previous successful experience in computer-assisted education, the investigators will refine the current CO-ED platform to implement and test a novel system for individualized continuous patient education (iCOPE). The iCOPE platform will be specifically designed to support rapid adaptation, customization, and dissemination of the CER products to the difficult-to-reach populations. The iCOPE platform will implement universal means for customized delivery of CER information in the format of interactive self-paced educational modules, quick "question & answer" guides, and interactive decision aids. In addition, the iCOPE platform will support the innovative concept of continuous patient health education by providing patients with easy access to the interactive CER updates via web, MP3 players and phone-based interactive voice response (IVR) technology. Though iCOPE will be designed to support the whole spectrum of CER products, in this project the investigators will focus on the Comparative Effectiveness Research Summary Guide (CERSG) entitled "Pills for Type 2 Diabetes."

The following primary hypothesis will be tested in the RCT: Use of the iCOPE platform will be associated with improvement in CERSG knowledge in elderly at 6 months after the intervention.

The investigators will also examine the impact of iCOPE on medication adherence self-efficacy, diabetes medication satisfaction, HbA1c, and CERSG acceptance.

Study Overview

Status

Withdrawn

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Interactive, computer-based education has the potential to greatly increase interest, because the learner actively participates in the learning process (Fox, 2009). In addition, the involvement of auditory, visual, and interactive learning strategies can increase recall of information. Computer-assisted educational programs may incorporate features that promote ease of use, be written in multiple languages, be scripted at a level that addresses the needs of low literacy learners, and be viewed as often as needed by a patient (Fox, 2009).

Several studies reported results of using computer technology in educating elderly patients about health conditions. Stromberg et al (2006) used a single-session, interactive computer-based educational program about chronic heart failure in elderly patients. They demonstrated that interactive computer-mediated education may be effectively used to increase patients' knowledge, about heart failure. Another study, conducted by Lin et al (2009), evaluated the usability of a touch-screen-enabled personal education program (PEP). The results showed that the system was evaluated as usable and useful, and older adults were satisfied with their experience. Similar findings were reported by Neafsey et al (2008) who also evaluated a patient-centered computer-mediated program using touch screen computers. Authors reported high satisfaction of the older adult users, increased knowledge and self-efficacy for avoiding adverse self-medication behaviors.

Elderly patients are less likely than younger patients to seek incidental information on their condition via internet. (Tian & Robinson, 2008) Elderly patients therefore are less likely to navigate internet looking for information about evidence or treatment guidelines for their conditions. More targeted efforts may be needed to reach such populations. Disseminating information via combination of high technology media along with traditional media that are easily usable is helpful (Longo, 2005). A recent review of barriers and drivers of health IT use by elderly, very ill, and underserved, revealed that such technology can play a role in offering effective interventions. The consumer perceptions on benefits from use of system, convenience of use, and familiar technology were all important factors for intervention success (Jimison et al., 2008).

Study Type

Interventional

Phase

  • 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
    • Maryland
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21224
        • Johns Hopkins University
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21205
        • Johns Hopkins University
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21224
        • Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center

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

Ages Eligible for Study

65 years and older (Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • have clinical diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes;
  • take oral diabetes medications;
  • be 65 years of age or older at the time of randomization;
  • plan to remain in the Maryland/DC area until the completion of the study follow-up;
  • understand English at the 5th grade level.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • plan to leave Maryland/DC area before the completion of the study follow- up;
  • presence of significant cognitive impairment based on a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≤23
  • do not speak English.

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: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Control Group
The study participants randomized to the Group 2 will serve as a control. At the beginning of the study, they will receive a CERSG brochure printed from the AHRQ site. They will be asked to study it to the best of their ability throughout the day.
Experimental: iCOPE Intervention group
iCOPE intervention group will receive a CERSG brochure via the iCOPE system.
Other: iCOPE Intervention group
The study participants in the intervention group will use iCOPE platform providing adapted CERSG content in an interactive and tailored way. The intervention provided by the iCOPE platform will be implemented with the understanding that it should be user-friendly and not time consuming. Initially, all participants will be asked to complete the computer-mediated interactive CERSG module via touch screen tablet PC provided at hospital, in a primary care office, and in senior centers. The total time to complete the curriculum is about 30 min, however the patients will be able to distribute this time throughout a day at their convenience. Once the educational curriculum is completed, the intervention subjects will receive access to other components of the iCOPE platform.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in CERSG Knowledge Score from baseline to 24-hr and to 6-month follow up
Time Frame: The Knowledge Test will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.
CERSG Knowledge Score will be used to assess the overall patient knowledge of the information provided in the CERSG entitled "Pills for Type 2 Diabetes." The score will represent a percentage of correct answers to 30 true/false items designed in accordance with the content of the CERSG.
The Knowledge Test will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Medication adherence self-efficacy
Time Frame: The medication adherence self-efficacy measure will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.
Medication adherence self-efficacy will measure self-efficacy of taking medications.
The medication adherence self-efficacy measure will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.
Diabetes Medication Satisfaction
Time Frame: Diabetes medication satisfaction measure will be administered at the baseline and at the 6-month follow-up.
Diabetes Medication Satisfaction measure is a diabetes-specific measure, assessing medication treatment satisfaction in three domains: Efficacy, Burden, Symptoms (Side Effects).
Diabetes medication satisfaction measure will be administered at the baseline and at the 6-month follow-up.
Glucosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c)
Time Frame: Glucosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values will be obtained closest to the date of the baseline evaluation and 6-month follow-up.
Glucosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) will be obtained from Electronic Medical Record (Centricity) at Johns Hopkins Community Physicians (JHCP).
Glucosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values will be obtained closest to the date of the baseline evaluation and 6-month follow-up.
CERSG Acceptance
Time Frame: The CERSG acceptance measure will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.
CERSG acceptance will measure patient acceptance and comprehension of CERSG
The CERSG acceptance measure will be administered at the baseline, 24-hr after the introduction of the CERSG, and at the 6-month follow-up.

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Johns Hopkins University

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Joseph Finkelstein, MD, PhD, Johns Hopkins University

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

August 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 9, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 13, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

December 15, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

May 18, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2020

Last Verified

May 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • NA_00040442

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

The data contain sensitive information

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.

Clinical Trials on Type 2 Diabetes

Clinical Trials on iCOPE Intervention group

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Belarus

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe