- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT05365048
Provider Recommendation and HPV Vaccination (HPVV)
Effectiveness and Mechanisms of Multilevel Implementation Strategies to Improve Provider Recommendation and Advance HPV Vaccination: a Cluster Randomized Trial
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
US teens remain at risk of developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers due to inadequate HPV vaccine uptake, despite strong endorsement in clinical guidelines and substantial intervention efforts by healthcare providers and public health entities. A strong recommendation from a clinician has been identified as the most powerful facilitator of HPV vaccine uptake, yet less than half of parents of pre-teens for whom routine HPV vaccination is recommended by the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices receive an HPV vaccine recommendation from their providers. Unfortunately, training clinicians in effective HPV vaccine communication alone produces only a small improvement in vaccination rates. In order to develop effective interventions for improving HPV vaccine uptake, there is a critical need to understand the full range of multilevel factors influencing providers' likelihood and effectiveness in a strong recommendation (secondary outcome). Previous studies have demonstrated the complexity of barriers to HPV vaccination, including their multilevel, multi-factorial nature and heterogeneity across communities and practice settings; as reflected in our and others' data. However, most intervention studies display two limitations: 1) many are single level and single component (e.g., parent education only), leaving many barriers unaddressed; and 2) most address pre-selected barriers using pre-specified interventions that are fixed for all sites. This "prescribed" approach ignores differences in barriers across sites (due to varying context, culture, etc.), and likely leaves key local barriers unaddressed. These interventions have mostly shown modest and inconsistent success. Current thinking in implementation science suggests that significant improvement in HPV vaccination rates will require synergistic, multi-level, multi-component interventions tailored to the local context and barriers.
The study goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of three implementation strategies (local-tailored, prescribed strategy, and usual care) to improve HPV vaccination rates among children 9-12 years old. Study Aims A1) Examine baseline associations between patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors and variations in (a) HPV vaccination rates; (b) the quality of the provider recommendation; and (c) the impact of provider recommendation on vaccine uptake. A2) Conduct a cluster RCT comparing the effectiveness of a "tailored" multilevel implementation strategy to a "prescribed" multilevel implementation strategy and to usual care in improving HPV vaccination rates (primary outcome) and strengthening the provider recommendation (secondary outcome). Sub-aim: Conduct cost-effectiveness analyses of the implementation strategies based on the RCT results. A3) Study mechanisms of the effect of the implementation strategies to understand the interaction between the intervention, local context, and participant experience combined with quantitative measures. Study Descriptions: In this study, we are using a 3-arm cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare: (1) An innovative "local-tailored" implementation strategy, engaging local care teams, using local barrier assessment and barrier-driven local tailoring of interventions versus (2) A "prescribed" strategy, that involves pre-specified interventions addressing pre-selected vaccination barriers, guided by the 4 Pillars for Practice Transformation Program versus (3) Usual care - there are no research-led activities. This study will examine two theses: (a) interventions need to be multilevel and multi-component, and (b) local barrier assessment and intervention tailoring with the engagement of local teams (who are familiar with the local context) are needed to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine.
Clinics will be randomized into one of the three groups. Prior to randomization, clinics will be matched in triads on key attributes that may be associated with implementation success (e.g. geographic location, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs, membership, race/ethnicity, and baseline HPV vaccine coverage) using a SAS algorithm. The three clinics matched in a triad will be most like each other in these attributes. Within each triad, the three clinics will then be randomized to determine which receives the local-tailored strategy ( 20 clinics) vs prescribed ( 20 clinics) vs usual care (20 clinics). The study subjects will include pediatric physicians, nurses, and other clinical staff. We will also include other non-clinical individuals, such as department administrators. The outcome of interest is: improving HPV vaccination rates (primary outcome) and strengthening provider recommendations (secondary outcome). We will also examine assess other outcome measures such as HPV vaccine series completion rate in children 9-12 years, time taken to recommend the HPV vaccine (provider-centered outcome); perceived comfort/distress in discussing HPV vaccination with parents (provider-centered outcome), parent satisfaction with HPV vaccine communication (parent-centered outcome) and sustainment of interventions (system-centered outcomes). Study data will be obtained through collection electronic medical record extraction, patient surveys, and semi-structured interviews. The analysis will follow an intent-to-treat (ITT) strategy using a log-binomial or Robust Poisson model. Content analysis will be used to evaluate the qualitative data collected. We will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Multilevel Influences on the Cancer Care Continuum (MICC) to inform our overall study approach and provide rigor and structure to our analyses.
Study Type
Enrollment (Anticipated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Nancy Takahashi Cannnizzaro, PhD
- Phone Number: 626-564-7663
- Email: Nancy.Takahashi@kp.org
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Chunyi Hsu, MPH
- Phone Number: 626-564-3508
- Email: chunyi.hsu@kp.org
Study Locations
-
-
California
-
Pasadena, California, United States, 91101
- Recruiting
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California
-
Contact:
- Chunyi Hsu, MPH
- Phone Number: 626-564-3508
- Email: chunyi.hsu@kp.org
-
Contact:
- Nancy Takahashi Cannizzaro, PhD
- Phone Number: 626-564-7663
- Email: Nancy.Takahashi@kp.org
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- All KPSC pediatric clinics.
- All providers (physicians, nurses, and medical assistants) and department administrators from the pediatric department.
- Parents of HPV vaccine-eligible children (9-12 years old).
Exclusion Criteria:
- Providers and administrators who do not work for the pediatric department
- Parents of children older than 12 years and/or who did not have a clinic visit in the study period.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Other
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: Local Tailoring
The intervention arm will include 20 clinics randomly assigned to the intervention arm.
All physicians, nurses, department administrator and other staff members from the pediatric departments randomized to this arm will be included in the study, as well as parents of HPV vaccine eligible children (9-12 years old) who had one or more visits with their pediatric provider during the data collection period.
|
The "local-tailored" approach will be guided by a structured process involving the following: (1) convening a local HPV vaccine project team, (2) conducting a local diagnostic process to identify top barriers, (3) selecting from a menu of intervention options that will be offered in this study, categorized by core function (i.e., the forms and functions menu) that address top local barriers, and (4) deploying the selected interventions.
The barrier assessment and intervention customization are key processes for the local-tailored strategy, which allow clinics to devote resources to respond to unique local barriers in addition to common barriers.
|
Experimental: Prescribed Strategy
The intervention arm will include 20 clinics randomly assigned to the intervention arm..
All physicians, nurses, department administrator,s and other staff members from the pediatric departments randomized to this arm will be included in the study, as well as parents of HPV vaccine eligible children (9-12 years old) who had one or more visits with their pediatric provider during the data collection period.
|
The prescribed strategy is the standard implementation approach used by most health systems.
Our prescribed approach will be guided by the evidence-based, award-winning 4 Pillars™ Practice Transformation Program for improving vaccination rates in the outpatient setting.
The 4 Pillars™ address 4 main "functions", i.e., convenience, communication, office systems, and motivation to guide the selection of interventions.
For adolescent HPV vaccination, the 4 Pillars has demonstrated moderate effectiveness.
|
No Intervention: Usual Care
The intervention arm will include 20 clinics randomly assigned to the usual care arm.
All physicians, nurses, department administrators,s and other staff members from the pediatric departments randomized to this arm will be included in the study, as well as parents of HPV vaccine eligible children (9-12 years old) who had one or more visits with their pediatric provider during the data collection period.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Proportion of children 9-12 years old who received the first dose of the HPV vaccine -EMR
Time Frame: Year 1
|
9-12 years old who received the first dose of the HPV vaccine at pre-intervention.
Data obtained from electronic medical record (EMR)
|
Year 1
|
Proportion of children 9-12 years old who received the first dose of the HPV vaccine - EMR
Time Frame: Year 4
|
9-12 years old who received the first dose of the HPV vaccine at post-intervention
|
Year 4
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Provider Recommendation - survey
Time Frame: Year 1
|
Questions to assess time spent on recommending the HPV vaccine, frequency of recommending the vaccine and content of discussion.
In the baseline parent survey, we will ask questions regarding what the physician mentioned regarding the HPV vaccine and perception on how the information was discussed.
We will derive a recommendation quality score.
|
Year 1
|
Provider Recommendation - survey
Time Frame: Year 4
|
At post-intervention, surveys will include questions to assess time spent on recommending the HPV vaccine, frequency of recommending the vaccine and content of discussion.
We will derive a recommendation quality score.
|
Year 4
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
HPV vaccine series completion - EMR
Time Frame: Year 1 through Year 4
|
9-12 year old who received 2 doses of the HPV vaccine during data collection period
|
Year 1 through Year 4
|
Time taken to recommend the HPV vaccine - survey
Time Frame: Year 1
|
Time taken by provider to recommend the HPV vaccine at pre-intervention.
|
Year 1
|
Time taken to recommend the HPV vaccine - survey
Time Frame: Year 4
|
Time taken by provider to recommend the HPV vaccine at post-intervention.
|
Year 4
|
Perceived comfort/distress in discussing HPV vaccination with parents - survey
Time Frame: Year 1
|
Provider perception on comfort/distress in discussing the vaccine at pre-intervention.
|
Year 1
|
Perceived comfort/distress in discussing HPV vaccination with parents - survey
Time Frame: Year 4
|
Provider perception on comfort/distress in discussing the vaccine at post-intervention.
|
Year 4
|
Parent satisfaction with HPV vaccine communication - survey
Time Frame: Year 1
|
Satisfaction with provider communication regarding the HPV vaccine at pre-intervention.
|
Year 1
|
Parent satisfaction with HPV vaccine communication - survey
Time Frame: Year 4
|
Satisfaction with provider communication regarding the HPV vaccine at post-intervention.
|
Year 4
|
Sustainment of study interventions - survey
Time Frame: Year 4
|
Provider perception regarding the sustainment of the local-tailored or prescribed strategy after study ends.
This question will be asked at post-intervention only.
|
Year 4
|
Fidelity - survey
Time Frame: 12 month after intervention period
|
The fidelity to the interventions will be obtained through the post-intervention provider surveys.
An overall fidelity score will be obtained.
|
12 month after intervention period
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Erin Hahn, PhD, KPSC Department of Research and Evaluation
- Principal Investigator: Chun R Chao, PhD, KPSC Department of Research and Evaluation
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Study Completion (Anticipated)
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
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
- R01CA255872 (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 Human Papillomavirus
-
Queen Mary University of LondonCompleted
-
Lake Cumberland District Health DepartmentMerck Sharp & Dohme LLCCompletedHuman PapillomavirusUnited States
-
The University of Hong KongQueen Mary Hospital, Hong KongUnknown
-
Global Alliance to Immunize Against AIDS Vaccine...Merck Sharp & Dohme LLCUnknownHuman PapillomavirusMali
-
The AlfredMerck Sharp & Dohme LLCCompletedHuman Papillomavirus Infection | Human PapillomavirusAustralia
-
H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research InstituteMerck Sharp & Dohme LLCCompleted
-
Laval UniversityCompletedHuman PapillomavirusCanada
-
University Hospital, ToulouseCompleted
-
University of North Carolina, Chapel HillHarvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM); Pfizer; North Carolina Department of Health...CompletedHuman PapillomavirusUnited States
-
University of CincinnatiRecruitingPapillomavirus Vaccines | Human Papillomavirus VirusesUnited States
Clinical Trials on Local Tailoring implementation strategy
-
Yale UniversityNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID); National Heart...CompletedTuberculosis | Tuberculosis, PulmonaryUganda
-
Chun ChaoPatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteRecruitingCervical Cancer | Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice | Health Care Utilization | Human PapillomavirusUnited States
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentUnknown
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentActive, not recruitingCognitive Function | Functional StatusUnited States
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentActive, not recruitingKnee OsteoarthritisUnited States
-
ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health...HAN University of Applied SciencesUnknown
-
Karolinska InstitutetCompleted
-
Geisinger ClinicNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)Enrolling by invitationFamilial HypercholesterolemiaUnited States
-
Wake Forest University Health SciencesNational Cancer Institute (NCI)CompletedCancer | Colorectal Cancer | Colon Cancer | Rectum CancerUnited States
-
Massachusetts General HospitalNational Cancer Institute (NCI)RecruitingColo-rectal CancerUnited States