Assessing the Impact of a Financial Navigation Program for Patients With Multiple Myeloma

June 22, 2023 updated by: Abramson Cancer Center at Penn Medicine

Assessing the Impact of a Financial Navigation Program for Patients With Multiple Myeloma: a Randomized Controlled Trial

The study is a randomized controlled trial to develop and evaluate a coordinated financial navigation program at the Abramson Cancer Center (ACC) for patients with multiple myeloma and identify barriers to its broader implementation.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Many financial support services are available to patients at the ACC, but are offered by different umbrella departments and rely on self- or clinician-referrals. Financial Advocacy provides assistance with insurance benefits, copayment assistance and hospital-based financial support. Social work assists with costs not directly related to treatment and also connects patients with community resources. Programs that increase coordination between these departments and proactively screen patients for financial hardship may enhance the reach of available services. However, such programs are resource intensive. As such, obtaining a better understanding of their benefits and any barriers to their expansion is a necessary first step to their broader implementation.

The long-term goal is to implement evidence-based practices that reduce ACC patients' financial burden. The overall objective of this proposal is to develop and evaluate a coordinated financial navigation program at the ACC for patients with multiple myeloma and identify barriers to its broader implementation. The rationale is that understanding the program's effectiveness and any barriers to its scalability will guide the way in which it could be incorporated into existing ACC workflows to maximize benefit for patients.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

103

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

    • Pennsylvania
      • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19104
        • Penn Medicine

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

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 1. Patients actively receiving systemic therapy at the ACC, defined as receiving any anti-myeloma treatment and at least monthly follow-up at PCAM4 or one of our satellite locations (CCH, Princeton, Lancaster, Cherry Hill, Valley Forge, Radnor)

    • These patients will be approached/recruited in-person on the same date as their return visit (follow-up appointment for established patients)
    • These patients may have already been seen by FA/SW (we will record this information and control for this in the final statistical models)
    • The rationale for using the "follow up at least monthly" criterion is because it will allow our research coordinators to easily and readily review charts of patients scheduled for follow up with myeloma specialists. This strategy will only exclude patients who receive oral maintenance anti-myeloma therapy who follow up less than once monthly (e.g. lenalidomide maintenance only).

      2. New patients expected to start therapy, who are expected to meet criterion #1.

    • These patients will be approached/recruited at their first return visit.
    • If these patients are not expected to return within 2 weeks of the initial visit, a telephone consent will be considered/offered

Exclusion Criteria:

  • o Have completed induction treatment and have stopped all systemic treatment in preparation for an autologous stem cell transplant [SCT] (rationale: patients are pre-screened for being able to finance their transplant before proceeding)

    • Are referred only for autologous SCT (they would not qualify by criterion #1, anyway)
    • Actively receive systemic therapy but do not follow up more than once monthly

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: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Intervention
Patients randomized to the intervention arm will be enrolled in a four-month coordinated financial navigation program. This program will take a more proactive, coordinated, and systematic approach and includes concrete action plans, and frequent and standardized follow-ups. All patients randomized to the intervention arm will meet with the nurse navigator (NN) for an intake. The NN will introduce navigation services and navigator's NN role and describe the financial navigation program (e.g., goals and expectations of the financial advocacy and social work programs). Next, the navigator will elicit from the patient their potential and current barriers to completing the diagnostic test or treatment. The navigator will then perform proactive outreach to these resources and coordinate an action plan with the patient.
Patients randomized to the intervention arm will be enrolled in a four-month coordinated financial navigation program. This program will take a more proactive, coordinated, and systematic approach and includes concrete action plans, and frequent and standardized follow-ups. All patients randomized to the intervention arm will meet with the nurse navigator (NN) for an intake. The NN will introduce navigation services and navigator's NN role and describe the financial navigation program (e.g., goals and expectations of the financial advocacy and social work programs). Next, the navigator will elicit from the patient their potential and current barriers to completing the diagnostic test or treatment. The navigator will then perform proactive outreach to these resources and coordinate an action plan with the patient.
No Intervention: Usual Care
Patients are connected to financial advocacy and social work on an ad hoc basis, rather than systematically. We hypothesize that many patients who would qualify and benefit from these services are not using them or are being referred late in their treatment course, which is contributing to their financial hardship and adversely affecting their healthcare.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST)
Time Frame: 4 months
Primary outcome is assessing for change in participants' COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) from the baseline assessment to repeat assessment after 4 months of financial navigation. Scores range from 0-44, with lower scores representing greater financial hardship.
4 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G)
Time Frame: 4 months
Secondary outcome is assessing for change in participants' Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) as measured in part by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) from the baseline assessment to repeat assessment after 4 months of financial navigation. The FACT-G includes 4 subscales (physical well-being, social/family well-being, emotional well-being, and functional well-being). The score ranges from 0-108 with a higher score indicating better quality of life.
4 months
Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form [PSQ-18]
Time Frame: 4 months
Secondary outcome is assessing for change in participants' HRQOL as measured in part by the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form [PSQ-18] from the baseline assessment to repeat assessment after 4 months of financial navigation. The PSQ-18 includes 7 subscales (general satisfaction, technical quality, interpersonal manner, communication, financial aspects, time spent with doctor, and convenience). The score ranges from 18-90 points with higher scores indicating increased patient satisfaction.
4 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Edward Stadtmauer, MD, Penn Medicine

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)

March 4, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 22, 2023

Study Completion (Actual)

June 22, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 21, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 1, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

July 7, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 23, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 22, 2023

Last Verified

June 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

IPD Plan Description

Undecided

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 Multiple Myeloma

Clinical Trials on Coordinated Financial Navigation Program

3
Subscribe