Enhancing Community Capacity to Improve Cancer Care Delivery

July 18, 2022 updated by: Manali Indravadan Patel, Stanford University

Enhancing Community Capacity to Improve Cancer Care Delivery: The Effect of a Lay Health Worker Intervention on Patient-reported Symptoms, Healthcare Use, Total Costs of Care, and End-of-life Care Delivery

Undertreated patient symptoms and resulting acute care use require approaches that improve symptom-burden. Previously a a lay health worker (LHW)-led symptom screening intervention was developed for patients with advanced cancer. This intervention will be expanded to all patients with cancer and the LHW will be trained to refer patients to palliative care and behavioral health. This intervention will evaluate the effect on symptom-burden, survival, healthcare use, and total costs.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

From 11/1/2016 - 9/30/2018, all newly diagnosed Medicare Advantage enrollees with solid or hematologic malignancies were enrolled in the intervention. Outcomes were compared outcomes to patients in the year prior (control arm). The primary outcome was change in symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at baseline, 6- and 12-months post-enrollment. Secondary outcomes were between-group comparison of survival, 12-month healthcare use and costs.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

832

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

    • California
      • Los Angeles, California, United States
        • Oncology Institute for Hope and Innovation

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:

  • Newly diagnosed with cancer
  • Diagnosis of relapse or progressive disease (any cancer diagnosis) as identified by imaging or biopsy and confirmed by physician.
  • Must be 18 years or older.
  • Must have capacity to verbally consent

Exclusion Criteria:

-Inability to consent to the study due to lack of capacity as documented by the referring physician.

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: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Intervention Group Arm
Patients randomized into the intervention will be assigned a lay health worker who will contact the patient to begin the intervention. The intervention includes: proactive symptom assessments for patients for up to 12-months.
Usual care as provided by local oncologists
The intervention is a 12-month telephonic program in which a lay health worker (LHW), supervised on-site by a registered nurse practitioner (RNP), assessed patient symptoms after diagnosis using the validated Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) (cite) with the frequency of symptom assessment varying based on patient risk.
Active Comparator: Control Group Arm
The control group arm will receive usual care as provided by their local oncologists.
Usual care as provided by local oncologists

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) Symptom Screen
Time Frame: Baseline (at time of patient enrollment)
Each patient will receive a quantitative symptom assessment survey (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale). The scale is a 10-point scale measured from 0 to 10 where 0 represents no symptom and 10 represents the worse severity of the symptom. The scale measures 10 symptoms.
Baseline (at time of patient enrollment)
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) Symptom Screen
Time Frame: 6 months after patient enrollment
Each patient will receive a quantitative symptom assessment survey (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale) at 6 months. The scale is a 10-point scale measured from 0 to 10 where 0 represents no symptom and 10 represents the worse severity of the symptom. The scale measures 10 symptoms.
6 months after patient enrollment
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) Symptom Screen
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Each patient will receive a quantitative symptom assessment survey (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale) at 12 months. The scale is a 10-point scale measured from 0 to 10 where 0 represents no symptom and 10 represents the worse severity of the symptom. The scale measures 10 symptoms.
12 months after patient enrollment
Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) Depression Screen
Time Frame: Baseline (at time of patient enrollment)
Each patient will receive a Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at baseline. PHQ-9 is measured on a scale of 0-27, where scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 are cut-points for mild, moderate, moderately severe and severe depression, respectively.
Baseline (at time of patient enrollment)
Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) Depression Screen
Time Frame: 6 months after patient enrollment
Each patient will receive a Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at 6 months. PHQ-9 is measured on a scale of 0-27, where scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 are cut-points for mild, moderate, moderately severe and severe depression, respectively.
6 months after patient enrollment
Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) Depression Screen
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Each patient will receive a Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at 12 months. PHQ-9 is measured on a scale of 0-27, where scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 are cut-points for mild, moderate, moderately severe and severe depression, respectively.
12 months after patient enrollment

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
% of patients with Emergency Department Visit within 12-months after patient enrollment (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Emergency Department use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of the % of patients with emergency department visits between study arms.
12 months after patient enrollment
% of patients with Hospitalization Visits within 12 months after patient enrollment (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Hospitalization use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of hospitalizations between the two study arms.
12 months after patient enrollment
% of patients with a Hospice Consult within 12-months after patient enrollment (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Hospice consult for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment.
12 months after patient enrollment
Total Health Care Costs (Claims Review)
Time Frame: 12 months after patient enrollment
Total Health Care Costs for each patient will be abstracted by medical claims data review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment.
12 months after patient enrollment
% of patients with an Acute Care Facility Death (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Acute Care Facility Deaths for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review and claims review for each patient who has died at 12-months followup. We will evaluate comparisons of Acute Care Facility Deaths between study arms.
30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
% of patients with Emergency Department Visit in the last 30 days of life (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Emergency Department use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of emergency department visits between study arms.
30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
% of patients with Hospitalization Visits in the last 30 days of life (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Hospital use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of hospitalization use between study arms.
30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
% of patients with a Hospice Consult in the last 30 days of life (Chart Review)
Time Frame: 30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Hospice use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of hospice use between study arms.
30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Total Costs of Care (Claims Review)
Time Frame: 30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up
Total costs of care for each patient will be obtained through claims data for each patient for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of Total costs of care between study arms.
30 days prior to death for patients who died at 12-months follow-up

Collaborators and Investigators

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

November 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 24, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 25, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

September 27, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 21, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 18, 2022

Last Verified

July 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 455

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

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

Clinical Trials on Usual Care

3
Subscribe