- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04737759
Taking Care of Us: A Dyadic Intervention for Heart Failure Couples (TCU)
Taking Care of Us: A Dyadic Intervention for Heart Failure
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
There is a critical need for theoretically- and empirically-driven dyadic interventions to improve the outcomes of both adults with heart failure and their partners. The proposed study will evaluate a novel, dyadic program, Taking Care of Us, versus an educational counseling condition using a randomized controlled trial on 72 couples living with heart failure. Both programs are offered via Zoom by trained interventionists and last approximately two months.
Specifically, we will 1) determine the efficacy of the Taking Care of Us intervention on dyadic health; 2) determine the efficacy of the Taking Care of Us intervention on dyadic appraisal and dyadic management; and 3) determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Taking Care of Us intervention.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Massachusetts
-
Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02111
- Tufts Medical Center
-
Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, United States, 02467
- Boston College
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria: Adults with Heart Failure:
- Diagnosis of heart failure for at least three months
- Current heart failure symptoms (i.e., NYHA Class II-III; AHA/ACC Stage C)
- Age greater than or equal to 18 years
- Willing and able to provide informed consent
- Reachable by telephone/email
- Access to device with camera (e.g., computer, tablet) to participate in Zoom sessions
- Have a co-residing spouse/unmarried partner willing to participate
Inclusion Criteria: Spouses/Partners:
- Age greater than or equal to 18 years
- Co-residing with the adult with heart failure at time of recruitment
- Have lived with the adult with heart failure for at least one year
- Willing and able to provide informed consent
Exclusion Criteria:
- Major and uncorrected hearing impairment
- Significant cognitive impairment
- Heart transplantation/mechanical circulatory support prior to enrollment
- Concomitant terminal illness that would impede participation
- Active psychosis or severe substance abuse that would impair the ability to complete the study
- Inability to complete the requirements of the study, including enrolment in an additional trial
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Taking Care of Us
Taking Care of Us involves seven sessions delivered via Zoom to couples over approximately two months.
Sessions last approximately 45-60 minutes and are delivered by a trained interventionist.
The program is a communication-based, relationship-focused intervention that is strengths-based and fosters new skills to support couples managing heart failure.
The goals of the program are to 1) target the couple with heart failure as a team; 2) increase shared appraisal within the couple; 3) improve communication skills within the couple; 4) improve collaboration within the couple and dyadic management of heart failure; 5) improve confidence within the couple; and 6) improve both individual and dyadic health and well-being.
|
A social-behavioral intervention that is targeted at the couple living with heart failure and delivered via Zoom.
|
|
Active Comparator: SUPPORT
The SUPPORT program involves three sessions delivered via Zoom to couples over approximately two months.
Sessions last approximately 45-60 minutes and are delivered by a trained interventionist.
This arm is an educational intervention to support management of heart failure.
|
SUPPORT is an educational counseling intervention that is targeted at the couple living with heart failure and delivered by Zoom.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Physical Quality of Life Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition.
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Physical quality of life score from the 10-item PROMIS Global Health Short Form. 4 items recoded to 1-5 scale for potential range of 1-20.
Higher scores indicate better physical quality of life.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Mental Quality of Life Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition.
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Mental quality of life score from the 10-item PROMIS Global Health Short Form. 4 items recoded to 1-5 scale for potential range of 1-20.
Higher scores indicate better mental quality of life.
|
5 months after baseline
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Depressive Symptom Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition.
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression CESD 20-item measure.
Items are on a 0-3 scale with potential range of 0-60 with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Care Strain Scores in Spouses in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition.
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
The 16-item Multidimensional Caregiver Strain Index measures physical, social, interpersonal strain and time constraints and demands related to providing care on a 1-5 scale.
Potential range of scores is 16-80 with higher scores indicating greater strain.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Heart Failure Related Quality of Life Scores in Persons With Heart Failure in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Total quality of life score assessed by the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire.
Items are converted to a 0-100 scale with higher scores indicating better heart failure related quality of life.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Difference in Dyspnea Scores in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Patient dyspnea scores assessed by the 6-item Heart Failure Somatic Perception Scale.
Items ask about how much the person was bothered by dyspnea during the last week on a 0 (not at all) to 5 (extremely bothersome) scale for a potential range of 0-30.
Higher scores indicate greater dyspnea.
It was not possible to examine changes in incongruence within couples due to small sample so between-group differences with patients and spouses (reporting their perception of patient's dyspnea) were calculated.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Difference in Pain Interference Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Pain interference was assessed using the six-item PROMIS pain interference scale with items ranging from 1-5 for a potential range of 6-30.
Higher scores indicate more pain interference.
It was not possible to examine changes in incongruence within couples due to small sample so between-group differences with patients and spouses (reporting their perception of patient's pain interference) were calculated.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Difference in Fatigue Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition.
Time Frame: 5 months baseline
|
Fatigue was assessed using the eight-item PROMIS fatigue scale with items on a 1-5 scale for a potential range of 8-40.
Higher scored indicate more fatigue.
It was not possible to examine changes in incongruence within couples due to small sample so between-group differences with patients and spouses (reporting their perception of patient's fatigue) were calculated.
|
5 months baseline
|
|
Change in Collaboration Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Collaborative symptom management was assessed using the six-item Stanford Chronic Disease Self-Management measure with items reworded to ask how much couples worked together to prevent symptoms (e.g., fatigue, pain, emotional distress) from interfering with what the person with heart failure wanted to do or to reduce the need to see a provider on a 1 (never) to 10 (always) scale.
Average summary scores had the potential to range from 1-10 with higher scores indicating greater collaborative management.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Confidence Scores in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Confidence was measured using the 6-item Stanford Chronic Disease Self-Management measure to assess confidence to manage six aspects of the illness (e.g., fatigue, emotional distress) on a 1 (no confidence) to 10 (a great deal of confidence) scale.
Summary scores were calculated by average the six items for a potential range of 1-10.Higher scores indicate greater confidence.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Communication Scores on the Active Engagement Subscale in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Communication within the couple was assessed using both scales from the Dyadic Coping measure.
Active engagement has five items that ask about how much one's partner engages in open communication and support on a 1-5 scale for a possible range of 5-25.
Higher scores indicate one's partner has a higher level of active engagement.
|
5 months after baseline
|
|
Change in Communication Scores on the Protective Buffering Subscale in Couples in the TCU vs SUPPORT Condition
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Communication within the couple was assessed using both scales from the Dyadic Coping measure.
Protective buffering has six items that ask about how much one's partner engages in hiding concerns and denying worries on a 1-5 scale for a possible range of 6-30.
Higher scores indicate one's partner has a higher level of protective buffering.
|
5 months after baseline
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Satisfaction Scores in Couples in the TCU Condition as a Measure of Acceptability.
Time Frame: 5 months after baseline
|
Satisfaction with the assigned program was assessed with a Likert item adapted from other intervention work about the benefits and drawbacks of the program.
Participants were asked to rate their satisfaction with the overall program on a 1 to 4 scale with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction.
|
5 months after baseline
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Karen S Lyons, PhD, Boston College
- Principal Investigator: Christopher S Lee, PhD, RN, Boston College
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
- 21.074
- R21AG068715 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
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 Heart Failure
-
Indiana UniversityRecruitingCongestive Heart Failure | Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) | Congestive Heart Failure Chronic | Congestive Heart Failure(CHF)United States
-
University of Health Sciences LahoreRecruitingAcute Decompensated Heart Failure | Heart Failure, Diastolic | Heart Failure, SystolicPakistan
-
Tufts Medical CenterMetro West Medical CenterCompletedCongestive Heart Failure | Diastolic Heart Failure | Systolic Heart FailureUnited States
-
Abbott Medical DevicesCompletedHeart Failure | Heart Failure, Diastolic | Heart Failure, Systolic | Heart Failure NYHA Class II | Heart Failure NYHA Class III | Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction | Heart Failure NYHA Class IV | Heart Failure With Normal Ejection Fraction | Heart Failure; With Decompensation | Heart Failure...United States, Canada
-
Manipal UniversityUnknownHeart Failure | Decompensated Heart Failure | Acute Heart Failure | Diastolic Heart Failure | Systolic Heart FailureIndia
-
Lakeland Regional Health Systems, Inc.RecruitingHeart Failure | Heart Failure Acute | Acute Heart Failure (AHF) | Heart Failure - NYHA II - IVUnited States
-
VA Eastern Colorado Health Care SystemNational Institute on Aging (NIA)CompletedHeart Failure | Heart Failure, Diastolic | Heart Failure, Systolic | Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction | Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction | Heart Failure; With Decompensation | Heart Failure,Congestive | Heart Failure AcuteUnited States
-
Eli Lilly and CompanyNot yet recruitingHeart Failure | Heart Failure, Diastolic | Heart Failure, SystolicUnited States, Japan
-
Wake Forest UniversityCompletedHeart Failure, Congestive | Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
-
Wake Forest UniversityNational Institute on Aging (NIA)CompletedHeart Failure, Congestive | Diastolic Heart FailureUnited States
Clinical Trials on Taking Care of Us
-
The University of Texas Medical Branch, GalvestonCompletedPrenatal DisorderUnited States
-
Universidad Nacional de RosarioUnknown
-
University of Alabama at BirminghamCompleted
-
Centers for Disease Control and PreventionEducation Development Center, Inc.; California State University, Long Beach; Sentient... and other collaboratorsCompleted
-
The University of Texas Health Science Center,...TerminatedAmniotic Fluid; Disorder | Fetal Growth AbnormalityUnited States
-
Rhode Island HospitalRecruitingFunctional Neurological DisorderUnited States
-
The Hospital for Sick ChildrenMcGill University; University of Alberta; McMaster University; Hamilton Health... and other collaboratorsCompleted
-
The Hospital for Sick ChildrenCompletedArthritis, Juvenile IdiopathicCanada
-
University Hospital, MontpellierTerminated
-
National University, SingaporeNational Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore; Action for AIDS SingaporeCompletedHIV/AIDS | Health Behavior | Stigma, Social | Sexually Transmitted Infection | Homosexuality | Health Care Seeking BehaviorSingapore