Systems Support Mapping in Guiding Self-Management in Stage I-III Colorectal Cancer Survivors

March 19, 2021 updated by: Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Use of Systems Support Mapping to Guide Patient-Driven Self-Management in Rural and Urban Cancer Survivors

This pilot trial studies how well systems support mapping works in guiding self-management in stage I-III colorectal cancer survivors. Systems support mapping helps participants to see complex self-management activities on paper, which makes them more actionable. Behavioral interventions, such as systems support mapping, may help colorectal cancer survivors facilitate self-awareness, create motivation for behavior change, and guide self-management.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:

I. To evaluate the feasibility of the systems support mapping (MAP) intervention in colorectal cancer survivors, as characterized by enrollment, intervention adherence, and retention rates.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:

I. To evaluate intervention acceptability as characterized by participant ratings.

II. To describe outcome variability to inform future studies. III. To identify multi-level contextual factors influencing self-management (SM).

IV. To qualitatively assess feasibility, acceptability using semi-structured interviews.

V. To examine how study results vary by rural-urban context.

OUTLINE:

Participants complete MAP in-clinic over 60-90 minutes.

After completion of study, participants are followed-up for up to 2 weeks.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

24

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

    • North Carolina
      • Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States, 27157
        • Wake Forest University Health Sciences

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

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosed with stage I-III colorectal cancer
  • Within 2 years of completing active treatment for colorectal cancer
  • Cognitively able to complete interviews as judged by the study team
  • Able to understand, read and write English

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Declined participation in the study

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: NA
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Supportive Care (MAP)
Participants complete MAP in-clinic over 60-90 minutes.
Ancillary studies
Ancillary studies
Complete MAP
Other Names:
  • MAP Intervention; System Support Mapping Intervention; MAP

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Enrollment Rate
Time Frame: Up to 1 year
To be calculated as the percent of eligible participants approached who agree to participate. Will use one-sample tests of negative binomial probabilities and binomial proportions to compare rates of feasibility to hypothesized values. Rates will be summarized using point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.
Up to 1 year
Participation Rate
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
To be calculated as the percent of participants who complete the study intervention among those enrolled. Will use one-sample tests of negative binomial probabilities and binomial proportions to compare rates of feasibility to hypothesized values. Rates will be summarized using point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Retention Rate
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
To be calculated as the proportion of participants who complete the study measures among those enrolled. Will use one-sample tests of negative binomial probabilities and binomial proportions to compare rates of feasibility to hypothesized values. Rates will be summarized using point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Self-reported Ratings of Intervention Acceptability
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize participant ratings of acceptability of intervention.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Measures of Autonomy Assessed by Index of Autonomous Functioning
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Each item in the scale ranges from 0-5, where 0=not at all true and 5=completely true. Scale is a mean of these items and thus ranges from the same minimum of 0 to the same maximum of 5. A higher score represent higher degree of autonomy.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Self-efficacy for Managing Cancer - Chronic Disease Scale
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Scale is a mean of physical and emotional functional management of chronic disease. Each of which runs from 1 (not at all confident) to 10 (totally confident). A higher score represents a higher degree of confidence in self-efficacy.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Self-Efficacy for Managing Symptoms - Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Form
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Overall score is based emotional and physical management of symptoms and is converted to a norm-based score that ranges from 0-100. Higher score means more of construct or response of managing symptoms.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
PROMIS - Relatedness Assessed by Healing Encounters and Attitudes Lists (HEAL) Patient-Provider Connection
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
The overall score is based on participant's relatedness to interventionists and is converted to a norm-based score that ranges from 26.6-72.5. Higher score on the HEAL measure means a higher degree of patient-provider connection as assessed by the patient.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Psychological Stress Assessed by Perceived Stress Scale
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) will be used to summarize proximal outcomes and change in health outcomes by assessment measure. The primary interest will be in estimating the variance for use in planning future studies. A 4-item questionnaires to assess participants' stress during the intervention at baseline and at two weeks with a difference of both time points. Scoring scale is from 0-4 ( 0 - never and 4 - very often). Scoring range is 0-16 with the higher score indicating higher stress.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Symptoms Assessed by Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Profile 29
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
PROMIS instruments contain a fixed number of items from seven PROMIS domains: depression; anxiety; physical function; pain interference; fatigue; sleep disturbance; and ability to participate in social roles and activities. The PROMIS-29, a generic health-related quality of life survey, assesses each of the 7 PROMIS domains with 4 questions. The questions are ranked on a 5-point Likert Scale. There is also one 11-point rating scale for pain intensity. Norm-based scores have been calculated for each domain on the PROMIS measures, so that a score of 50 represents the mean or average of the reference population. A score of 60 means that the person is one standard deviation above the reference population. On symptom oriented domains of PROMIS-29 (anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain interference, and sleep disturbance), higher scores represent worse symptomatology. On the function oriented domains (physical functioning and social role) higher scores represent better functioning.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Health Behaviors Assessed by Items on Tobacco Use
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize proximal outcomes. Participants were asked questions about their health behavior related to their past or present smoking behaviors (i.e. packs per day, last time they smoked) in order to help improve upon the information received to offer support for future studies.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Qualitative Assessment of Feasibility With Semi-structured Interviews
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Will conduct a qualitative content analysis. Qualitative data will be sent to an external vendor to be transcribed. Two internal study team members will double-code at least 10% of coding of transcripts from the semi-structured interviews and resolve any disagreements to ensure that robust and unbiased results are achieved. Will evaluate qualitative and quantitative analyses in a mixed-methods framework for consistency and discrepancies across all analyses to refine the protocol.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Qualitative Analysis of Systems Support Maps
Time Frame: Up to 1 year
The internal study team will work with collaborators through an iterative process to facilitate a qualitative content analysis of the large quantity of textual MAP data. Will examine all qualitative analyses by urban-rural status as classified using Rural Urban Commuting Area Codes. Qualitative results will be summarized by urban-rural status. Will also compare MAP results by rural-urban status.
Up to 1 year
Health Behaviors Assessed by Items on Physical Activity
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Participant's ability to participate in physical activities (types of activities, intensity, etc.) will be assessed. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize proximal outcomes. The primary interest will be in estimating the variance for use in planning future studies.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Health Behaviors Assessed by Items on Use of Complementary Health Approaches
Time Frame: Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Participants will assess the use of complementary or alternative therapies use since first diagnosed with cancer. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize proximal outcomes. The primary interest will be in estimating the variance for use in planning future studies.
Approximately 1.5-2 hours at baseline visit in clinic with a 2-week follow-up 2 weeks later
Qualitative Assessment of Acceptability With Semi-structured Interviews
Time Frame: Up to 1 year
Will conduct a qualitative content analysis. Qualitative data will be sent to an external vendor to be transcribed. Two internal study team members will double-code at least 10% of coding of transcripts from the semi-structured interviews and resolve any disagreements to ensure that robust and unbiased results are achieved. Will evaluate qualitative and quantitative analyses in a mixed-methods framework for consistency and discrepancies across all analyses to refine the protocol.
Up to 1 year
Qualitative Assessment of Changes in Outcomes With Semi-structured Interviews
Time Frame: Up to 1 year
Will conduct a qualitative content analysis. Qualitative data will be sent to an external vendor to be transcribed. Two internal study team members will double-code at least 10% of coding of transcripts from the semi-structured interviews and resolve any disagreements to ensure that robust and unbiased results are achieved. Will evaluate qualitative and quantitative analyses in a mixed-methods framework for consistency and discrepancies across all analyses to refine the protocol.
Up to 1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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.

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)

May 29, 2018

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

February 6, 2020

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

February 6, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 12, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 26, 2018

First Posted (ACTUAL)

May 9, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

April 19, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 19, 2021

Last Verified

March 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • IRB00048866
  • P30CA012197 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
  • NCI-2018-00587 (REGISTRY: CTRP (Clinical Trial Reporting Program))
  • CCCWFU 99118 (OTHER: Wake Forest University Health Sciences)

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.

Clinical Trials on Cancer Survivor

Clinical Trials on Questionnaire Administration

3
Subscribe