- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04080037
Assessing Opioid Care Practices Using CPV Patient Simulation Modules
Assessing Opioid Care Practices Using CPV Patient Simulation Modules to Improve Alignment With CDC Guidelines
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Primary care providers (PCPs) are often on the front lines of helping patients manage acute and chronic pain. These pain management decisions have become especially important in light of the national opioid crisis that has seen an unsettling rise in opioid dependency, over-doses and fatalities. The Centers for Disease Control has developed specific evidence-based guidelines to help clinicians make more informed decisions about appropriate use of opioids as well as identifying and managing patients at risk for opioid-use disorder and overdose.
The investigators' previous work has shown that patient simulations can rapidly and reliably measure unwarranted practice variation among providers. In addition, published work shows that patient simulations, when administered serially and combined with customized feedback on improvement opportunities can reduce practice variation and improve performance on patient-level quality measures. Given the challenge of the current opioid crisis and the large scope of unwarranted variation in medical practice, there is a need for scalable approaches to measure care decisions, provide feedback on improvement opportunities and benchmark performance to peers.
This study seeks to evaluate the impact of personalized measurement and feedback on evidence-based care decisions made by primary care providers across the country concerning opioid care. The study, a prospective cohort trial, will enroll primary care physicians (PCPs) practicing in the U.S. Upon enrollment, eligible providers will be asked to complete a questionnaire detailing their practice and professional background. They will then be asked to complete the following:
Pretest: Pre-project, participants will take a multiple-choice assessment test. These assessments measure CDC Opioid Guidelines knowledge and adherence. Study administrators will randomize half of providers to take Assessment A pre-intervention, and half to take Assessment B pre-intervention, and have attempted to make these two assessments of equal difficulty.
Intervention: All providers will then care for 1 online CPV QualityIQ patient simulation each week over the course of 6 weeks. The simulated patients will be adults aged 18-75 and present with clinical conditions commonly seen by PCPs, such as chronic or acute pain, for whom opioids are currently in use or may be considered. In the patient simulations, participants will make work-up, diagnostic and treatment decisions relevant to the patient's pain management and will receive real-time feedback on how those decisions align with the CDC recommendations. Each week, participants will receive an email notification with their case score from the previous week, how their care compares to their PCP peers, and a link their new case to be completed.
Posttest: Recruits will take the remaining assessment as described above after completion of the intervention.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
California
-
San Francisco, California, United States, 94109
- QURE Healthcare
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Board-certified in internal medicine or family medicine
- Minimum patient panel size of 1,000 patients
- At least 5% of their patients currently or previously using opioid medications
- English-speaking
- Access to the internet
- Informed, signed and voluntarily consented to be in the study
Exclusion Criteria:
- Not board certified in either internal medicine or family medicine
- Patient panel size less than 1,000 patients
- Less than 5% of their patients currently or previously using opioid medications
- Non-English speaking
- Unable to access the internet
- Do not voluntarily consent to be in the study
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Study Participants
All eligible and consented participants will be asked complete a multiple-choice opioid assessment based on the latest CDC opioid guidelines, then care for 6 online QualityIQ patient simulations and receive feedback on their care decisions.
They will then all complete an other multiple-choice assessment at the conclusion of the study.
|
Online patient cases designed to simulate typical patients seen in a primary care practice. In each case, providers will answer multiple-choice questions about their preferred course of action to work-up, diagnose and treat patients in the primary care setting. After each question, providers will receive evidence-based feedback, including references, on the appropriateness of each of their care decisions. Feedback will be supported with relevant reference to evidence-based guidelines, with a specific focus on the CDC opioid guidelines. Cases will cover typical primary care patients presenting with acute and chronic pain, who may or may not be already taking opioid medication.
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in provider scores on pre- and post-intervention assessments
Time Frame: 2 months
|
At the beginning and end of the study, participants with complete a 20 multiple-choice question assessment to measure familiarity with the latest CDC opioid guidelines. The assessment scales are known as the "QURE-Ascend Learning Modules: Opioids, Assessment A" and "QURE-Ascend Learning Modules: Opioids, Assessment B," both of which measure familiarity with the latest CDC guidelines via multiple-choice questions. Scores on the scales range from 0 to 100%, with a higher score representing greater familiarity with evidence-based care. There are no subscales within the measures. Between the assessment, they will care for online simulated patients and receive feedback on their care decisions. A primary outcome in the study will be to measure whether performance on the assessments improves after caring for the simulated patients and receiving feedback. Higher scores on the second assessment represent a better outcome. |
2 months
|
|
Change in the overall and the diagnostic and treatment quality scores in the CPV QualityIQ patient simulations.
Time Frame: 2 months
|
In each case, participants will answer multiple-choice questions about their preferred course of action to work-up, diagnose and treat patients in the primary care setting.
Each question has specific evidence-based scoring criteria identifying necessary and unnecessary care decisions.
Each provider will get a score for each case, ranging from 0 to 100 percentage based on the care decisions they make in the case.
Over the course of the project, the investigators will track the percentage of correct, evidence-based care decisions made by participants, with the hypothesis that serial measurement and feedback on evidence-based care decisions will lead to increases in appropriate decisions over time.
Higher scores represent a better outcome.
|
2 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Participant satisfaction as measured by post-evaluation survey
Time Frame: 2 months
|
Investigators will measure participant satisfaction as measured by post-evaluation survey.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 5 being the highest), participants will be asked about the overall quality of the material, the relevance to their practice and the educational content.
Higher scores represent a better outcome.
|
2 months
|
|
Physician engagement throughout the study
Time Frame: 2 months
|
The investigators will track the percentage of enrolled participants who stay engaged in the study and complete at least 80% of their patient simulation cases.
|
2 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: John Peabody, MD, PhD, QURE Healthcare
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Burgon TB, Cox-Chapman J, Czarnecki C, Kropp R, Guerriere R, Paculdo D, Peabody JW. Engaging Primary Care Providers to Reduce Unwanted Clinical Variation and Support ACO Cost and Quality Goals: A Unique Provider-Payer Collaboration. Popul Health Manag. 2019 Aug;22(4):321-329. doi: 10.1089/pop.2018.0111. Epub 2018 Oct 17.
- Weigel PA, Ullrich F, Shane DM, Mueller KJ. Variation in Primary Care Service Patterns by Rural-Urban Location. J Rural Health. 2016 Spring;32(2):196-203. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12146. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
- Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus TR, Lee M. Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA. 2000 Apr 5;283(13):1715-22. doi: 10.1001/jama.283.13.1715.
- Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, Jain S, Hansen J, Spell M, Lee M. Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study. Ann Intern Med. 2004 Nov 16;141(10):771-80. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00008.
- Schieber LZ, Guy GP Jr, Seth P, Young R, Mattson CL, Mikosz CA, Schieber RA. Trends and Patterns of Geographic Variation in Opioid Prescribing Practices by State, United States, 2006-2017. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Mar 1;2(3):e190665. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.0665. Erratum In: JAMA Netw Open. 2019 May 3;2(5):e194307.
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
- 01-QALM-2019
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 Pain
-
Boston Scientific CorporationRecruitingLow Back Pain | Chronic Pain | Chronic Low-back Pain | Leg Pain | Intractable Pain | Chronic Leg PainUnited States
-
Qi's ClinicNot yet recruitingNon-Cancer Pain,Musculoskeletal Pain,Chronic Pain,Acute Pain
-
Flowonix MedicalApproved for marketingBack Pain | Leg Pain | Trunk Pain | Intractable Pain | Arm Pain
-
George Washington UniversityRecruitingCervical Fusion | Pain, Back | Pain, Neck | Myofacial PainUnited States
-
Atatürk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Training...RecruitingPostoperative Pain | Postoperative Pain, Acute | Postoperative Pain, Chronic | VATSTurkey
-
Janssen Research & Development, LLCCompletedPain, Radiating | Pain, Burning | Pain, Crushing | Pain, Migratory | Pain, SplittingUnited States, France, Spain, Poland, Portugal
-
Universitat Jaume ICompletedPain, Acute | Pain, Chronic | OncologySpain
-
susanne beckerSNSFCompletedLow Back Pain | Pain, Acute | Pain, ChronicSwitzerland
-
University Hospital Schleswig-HolsteinZealand University Hospital; European Regional Development Fund; Design School...CompletedPain, Acute | Pain, Chronic | Pain Measurement | Pain, CancerGermany
-
University of Campinas, BrazilCompletedPREGNANCY | LUMBAR BACK PAIN | PELVIC PAIN
Clinical Trials on Quality IQ Patient Simulations
-
Qure Healthcare, LLCCE OutcomesCompletedDepression | Heart Failure | Pain | Hypertension | Diabetes | Osteoarthritis | AsthmaUnited States
-
IRCCS Policlinico S. DonatoUniversity of PaviaCompletedMyocardial Ischemia | Sudden Cardiac Death | Anomalous Coronary Artery Origin | Anomalous Coronary Artery Course | Anomalous Coronary Artery Arising from the Opposite Sinus | Anomalous Coronary Artery with Aortic Origin and Course Between the Great ArteriesItaly
-
Réseau de soins DeltaUniversity of St. Gallen - School of MedicineNot yet recruitingDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2
-
Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer CenterCompletedAnatomic Stage I Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IA Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IB Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IIB Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage III Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic... and other conditionsUnited States
-
University of California, San FranciscoBristol-Myers Squibb FoundationCompletedStage III Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage II Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIA Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIB Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIIA Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIIB Lung Cancer AJCC v8 | Malignant Neoplasm | Stage III Colorectal Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIIA Colorectal Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage IIIB Colorectal... and other conditionsUnited States
-
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire DijonCompletedIdiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis | Patient-caregiver DyadsFrance
-
Vastra Gotaland RegionRecruiting
-
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH); Aetna, Inc.Unknown
-
Assistance Publique Hopitaux De MarseilleCompletedVery Preterm Children With Dysexecutive DisordersFrance
-
Line MarkerAage og Johanne Louis-Hansens FondEnrolling by invitationVentral Hernia | Incisional Hernia | Parastomal HerniaDenmark