- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT03336190
Blue Star Cares: Innovative Approaches to Helping Military-Connected Caregivers (BSC)
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The purpose of this project is to evaluate an interactive training program for military-connected caregivers (MCCs) of wounded warriors. The program leverages existing resources and incorporates evidence-based training and peer-based support networks to enhance continuity of care. The program consists of an educational Toolkit (workbook) and an avatar training interaction where an MCC can practice skills learned from the toolkit training with the avatar (how to navigate difficult conversations). This is an educational training evaluation to determine whether or not avatar interaction can effectively improve health outcomes in MCCs.
The investigators will implement a pre-post design looking at a group of caregivers across multiple time points examining differences in outcomes from baseline (before engaging in the training/intervention) to after completing the training, including follow-ups at 3- and 6-months to evaluate longer-term outcomes.Those enrolled in the intervention will receive the complete training program (toolkit and avatar).
Project participants (i.e., MCCs who engage in the training and follow-up activities) will receive the (a) training toolkit workshop and will engage with the avatar to practice the knowledge and skills described in the workshop or will receive only the (b) training toolkit workshop (control).
Comparing the time differences will enable us to determine if the training program, specifically the avatar interaction, is associated with improved health and quality of life in caregivers of wounded warriors, enhanced caregiver social support and networks, improved patient (wounded warrior) experience of care, and reduced per capita costs of care for both the wounded warrior and caregiver.
Follow-up focus groups and interviews will be conducted to assess caregiver participant perspectives on what worked, what did not work, what they would like to see in the future, how the avatar interaction impacted them, and how the program could be improved in the future, as well as to clarify findings
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Maryland
-
Bethesda, Maryland, United States, 20814
- Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Participants must be a military-connected caregiver over the age of 18.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Participants under the age of 18 or not a military-connected caregiver. Active duty military personnel are unable to participate in this project.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Prevention
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: Intervention
Receives the full program, including the toolkit training and avatar interaction
|
Interaction with an avatar-based module to practice skills learned during the toolkit training
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
World Health Organization Quality of Life - Brief
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief version (WHOQOL-BREF).
The WHOQOL-BREF instrument comprises 26 items, which measure the following broad domains: physical health, psychological health, social relationships, and environment.
The WHOQOL-BREF is a shorter version of the original instrument that may be more convenient for use in large research studies or clinical trials.
The WHOQOL-BREF (Field Trial Version) produces a quality of life profile.
It is possible to derive four domain scores.
There are also two items that are examined separately: question 1 asks about an individual's overall perception of quality of life and question 2 asks about an individual's overall perception of their health.
The four domain scores denote an individual's perception of quality of life in each particular domain.
Domain scores are scaled in a positive direction (i.e. higher scores denote higher quality of life).
The mean score of items within each domain is used to calculate the domain score -
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Social support
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, military version.
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS).
The MSPSS (Zimet et al., 1988) is a 12-item self-report measure that inquires about three dimensions of social relationships (family, friends, and a significant other) on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = very strongly disagree to 7 = very strongly agree).
Higher scores on each of the subscales indicate higher levels of perceived support.
A Global satisfaction with perceived support score can be obtained by taking the sum of the three scales.
The current study added a fourth dimension relevant to military personnel that assessed sources of social support from military peers.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Depression
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Patient health questionnaire (PHQ)-2.
Frequency of depressive symptoms were assessed with the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2).
Items are rated on a 4-point scale from 0-3; higher scores indicate greater symptoms.
Respondents then indicate the difficulty the symptoms have made their life on a 4 point scale, where high scores indicate greater difficulty.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Anxiety
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Generalized anxiety disorder-7.Frequency of anxiety symptoms were assessed using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) (34).
Items are rated on a 4-point scale, where 5, 10, and 15 are used as cutoffs for mild, moderate, and severe anxiety, respectively.
Higher scores indicate greater symptoms
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Caregiver somatic symptoms
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
PATIENT HEALTH QUESTIONNAIRE (PHQ-15).
For scoring, response options for these two symptoms are coded as 0 ("not at all"), 1 ("several days"), or 2 ("more than half the days" or "nearly every day").
Thus, the total PHQ-15 score ranges from 0 to 30 and scores of ≥5, ≥10, ≥15 represent mild, moderate and severe levels of somatization.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Wounded warrior quality of life and health status
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief version (WHOQOL-BREF).
The WHOQOL-BREF instrument comprises 26 items, which measure the following broad domains: physical health, psychological health, social relationships, and environment.
The WHOQOL-BREF is a shorter version of the original instrument that may be more convenient for use in large research studies or clinical trials.
The WHOQOL-BREF (Field Trial Version) produces a quality of life profile.
It is possible to derive four domain scores.
There are also two items that are examined separately: question 1 asks about an individual's overall perception of quality of life and question 2 asks about an individual's overall perception of their health.
The four domain scores denote an individual's perception of quality of life in each particular domain.
Domain scores are scaled in a positive direction (i.e. higher scores denote higher quality of life).
The mean score of items within each domain is used to calculate the domain score -
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Caregiver knowledge
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
12 items assessing participant knowledge of caregiving.
Items are rated on a 5-point scale where higher scores indicate higher knowledge of caregiving skills and responsibilities.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
wounded warrior depression
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Patient health questionnaire (PHQ)-2.
Frequency of depressive symptoms were assessed with the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2).
Items are rated on a 4-point scale from 0-3; higher scores indicate greater symptoms.
Respondents then indicate the difficulty the symptoms have made their life on a 4 point scale, where high scores indicate greater difficulty.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
wounded warrior anxiety
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Generalized anxiety disorder-7.Frequency of anxiety symptoms were assessed using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) (34).
Items are rated on a 4-point scale, where 5, 10, and 15 are used as cutoffs for mild, moderate, and severe anxiety, respectively.
Higher scores indicate greater symptoms
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
wounded warrior somatic symptoms
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
PATIENT HEALTH QUESTIONNAIRE (PHQ-15).
For scoring, response options for these two symptoms are coded as 0 ("not at all"), 1 ("several days"), or 2 ("more than half the days" or "nearly every day").
Thus, the total PHQ-15 score ranges from 0 to 30 and scores of ≥5, ≥10, ≥15 represent mild, moderate and severe levels of somatization.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Costs of care
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Costs of care.
Costs of care will be calculated based upon extent of injuries, frequency of visits, and projected annual costs based upon responses to outcomes across the study.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Common stressors
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Checklist of 14 common stressors.
A checklist of 14 common stressors rated on a 10 point scale where higher scores indicate greater stress.
Items included marital conflict, family conflict, and problems being a caregiver.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Relationship satisfaction and intimacy
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
RELATIONSHIP ASSESSMENT SCALE.
A 7-item scale designed to measure general relationship satisfaction.
Respondents answer each item using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (low satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction).
Items 4 and 7 are reverse-scored.
Scoring is kept continuous.
The higher the score, the more satisfied the respondent is with his/her relationship.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
medical outcomes
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12).
SF-12 measures physical functioning, role limitation due to physical health problems, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role limitation due to emotional problems, and mental health. 2 items are used to estimate scores for four of the 8 health concepts (physical functioning: 0-5 where higher indicates more limited), role-physical: 0-3 where higher indicates more limited, role-emotional: 0-3 where higher indicates more limited, mental health: 0-11 where higher indicates more problems).
Scores for the remaining 4 (bodily pain: 0-4 where higher indicates more problems, general health: 0-4 where higher indicates more problems, vitality, and social functioning: 0-4 where higher indicates more problems) are estimated using a single item each.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Wounded warrior satisfaction of care
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire 18 (PSQ-18).
The short-form instrument, the PSQ-18, contains 18 items tapping each of the seven dimensions of satisfaction with medical care measured by the PSQ-III: general satisfaction (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), technical quality (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), interpersonal manner (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), communication (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), financial aspects (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), time spent with doctor (0-5, higher equals more disagreement), and accessibility and convenience (0-5, higher equals more disagreement).
Items are rated on a 5 point scale where higher scores indicate more disagreement.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
barriers to care
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
15 item barriers to care survey.
Respondents were asked about their use of professional physical or mental health services and about perceived barriers to physical and mental health treatment, particularly stigmatization as a result of receiving such treatment.
Items are rated on a 2 point scale where higher scores indicate barriers.
Overall scores range from 0-15 where higher scores indicate more barriers.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
wounded warriors injury & pain
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Pain and injury checklist.
Physical injuries were assessed with a 22-item checklist of body parts indicated on an image.
Respondents could check locations of injuries.
Number of injuries ranged from 0-22, where high scores indicate more injuries.
Pain was rated on a 10-point scale where higher scores indicate more pain.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
relationship happiness
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Relationship happiness with a single item, "Please slide the bar to the number, which best describes the degree of happiness, all things considered of your relationship" from 0-7 where higher scores indicate greater happiness.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Relationship quality
Time Frame: Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Relationship quality with a single item, "We have a good marriage/partnership" rated on a 5 point scale where higher scores indicate greater happiness.
|
Assess changes between baseline and 3 & 6 month follow-ups
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- UP-17-00273
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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 Quality of Life
-
Assiut UniversityUnknownImproving Quality of LifeEgypt
-
Children's National Research InstituteRecruitingProfessional Quality of LifeUnited States
-
Istituto Ortopedico RizzoliUniversity of BolognaActive, not recruitingImprove Quality of LifeItaly
-
B. Braun Medical SAUnknownQuality of Life of Colostomized Patient
-
Mattu UniversityCompletedBreif Description: Patients' Quality of Life ofEthiopia
-
University of South CarolinaNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)RecruitingHealth Related Quality of LifeUnited States
-
PharmanexSprim Advanced Life SciencesCompletedHealth-related Quality of LifeUnited States
-
Linkoeping UniversityRecruiting
-
South Valley UniversityActive, not recruitingDeterminants of Health-related Quality of Life for Patients After Renal Lithotripsy: PNL Versus RIRSHealth Related Quality of LifeEgypt
-
Region VästmanlandUnknownHealth Related Quality of Life
Clinical Trials on avatar-based training
-
Yale UniversityAmerican Heart AssociationActive, not recruiting
-
Universidad Rey Juan CarlosCompleted
-
University Hospital, MontpellierUniversity of Bristol; Université Montpellier; Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de... and other collaboratorsUnknown
-
Akdeniz UniversityThe Scientific and Technological Research Council of TurkeyCompletedDeveloping the ABEP-H | Determining the Effect of ABEP-HTurkey
-
Human Development Research Foundation, PakistanDuke University; University of LiverpoolCompleted
-
Psychiatric University Hospital, ZurichRecruitingSchizophrenia | Psychosis | Schizo Affective Disorder | Hearing Voices When No One is Talking (Symptom)Switzerland
-
Miami VA Healthcare SystemPfizerCompletedOveractive BladderUnited States
-
Ciusss de L'Est de l'Île de MontréalActive, not recruitingPsychotic Disorders | Mental Health Disorder | Cannabis Use DisorderCanada
-
Ciusss de L'Est de l'Île de MontréalCanadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)RecruitingPsychotic Disorders | Mental Health Disorder | Cannabis Use DisorderCanada
-
Johns Hopkins UniversityCompletedTobacco SmokingUnited States