The Care Ecosystem Consortium Effectiveness Study

November 15, 2023 updated by: University of California, San Francisco
The Care Ecosystem is an accessible, remotely delivered team-based dementia care model, designed to add value for patients, providers and payers in complex organizational and reimbursement structures. Care is delivered via the phone and web by unlicensed Care Team Navigators, who are trained and supervised by a team of dementia specialists with nursing, social work, and pharmacy expertise. The evidence base to date suggests that the Care Ecosystem improves outcomes important to people with dementia, caregivers, and payers when delivered in a controlled research environment, including reduced emergency department visits, higher quality of life for patients, lower caregiver depression, and reduced potentially inappropriate medication use (Possin et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2022). The investigators propose a rapid pragmatic trial in 6 health systems currently offering the Care Ecosystem program in geographically and culturally diverse populations. The investigators will leverage technology, delivering care via the phone and web and using electronic health records to monitor quality improvements and evaluate outcomes while maximizing external validity. The investigators will evaluate the effectiveness of the Care Ecosystem on outcomes important to patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, and health systems during the pandemic. By evaluating the real-world effectiveness in diverse health systems that are already providing this model of care, this project will bridge the science-practice gap in dementia care during an unprecedented time of heightened strain on family caregivers, healthcare providers and health systems.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

This study is a rapid, pragmatic, single-arm trial of 1,275 patients with dementia (PWD) and their caregivers (Total N = 2,550) at 6 US health systems currently offering the Care Ecosystem (CE) intervention to geographically and culturally diverse populations. The investigators will compare the effectiveness of 12-months of the CE intervention with a matched comparison group (N=1,275) identified from the EHR at each site. Patient health care utilization outcomes will be collected via patient insurance / Medicare claims and electronic health record data. Caregiver surveys completed via interview (phone, video or in-person) at baseline, 6-months and 12-months will serve the dual purpose of providing outcome data and supporting care.

This clinical trial is made up of four sub-studies on care quality, utilization, medications, and caregiver and patient experience. While all the sub-studies concern the same intervention group of dyads, each will use data from different sources, different analytic methods, and different controls. Care quality, utilization, and medication metrics will be compared to matched controls identified from the EHR. Caregiver and patient experience metrics will be compared pre/post and to controls from a prior Randomized Control Trial (RCT) (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02213458). For these reasons, there are primary and secondary endpoints for each.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

2550

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 Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

    • California
      • San Francisco, California, United States, 94158
        • Recruiting
        • University of California, San Francisco
        • Contact:
      • Torrance, California, United States, 90502
        • Recruiting
        • LA County Harbor-UCLA Medical Center
        • Contact:
    • Colorado
      • Denver, Colorado, United States, 80209
        • Recruiting
        • University of Colorado Health
        • Contact:
    • Louisiana
      • New Orleans, Louisiana, United States, 70121
    • Minnesota
    • Oregon
      • Portland, Oregon, United States, 97213

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, PWD participant

  1. Age 18+
  2. Provision of verbal consent (or surrogate consent), documented in REDCap, and assent
  3. Willingness to enroll in the Care Ecosystem program
  4. Lives in the community (i.e., not in an assisted living, board & care, skilled nursing or memory care facility) at the time of enrollment
  5. Have a dementia diagnosis documented in the EHR
  6. Has had a visit with the referring provider in the last 12 months
  7. Has a caregiver with a primary level of responsibility for the patient who is eligible and willing to participate

Inclusion Criteria, Caregiver participant

  1. Age 18+
  2. Provision of verbal consent, documented in REDCap
  3. Has a primary level of responsibility for the care of a PWD-participant who is enrolling in the study
  4. Willingness to enroll in the Care Ecosystem program and complete surveys

Exclusion Criteria, PWD participant

  1. PWD-participants for whom a substantial amount of the patient's healthcare utilization records cannot be accessed for research purposes by the study team. (see Note)
  2. Is currently, or was ever enrolled, in the Care Ecosystem program.
  3. Medical documentation indicates that the patient's dementia is a non-progressive type (e.g., due to a head injury or stroke, and not expected to progress).

Note: This exclusion criteria will be operationalized differently at each site based on variations in data access options for their patient population; these options will include EHR and Medicare. A small percentage of participants may be enrolled from underrepresented populations for whom a substantial amount of utilization records cannot be accessed with written approval from the study PI. All participants must be affiliated with one of the 6 participating health systems:

Ochsner Health System Providence Health & Services Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center HealthPartners Institute University of Colorado, Denver University of California, San Francisco

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: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Care Ecosystem
Patient and caregiver dyads receive the Care Ecosystem intervention

Applying the principles of person-and-family centered and collaborative care to dementia, the Care Ecosystem (CE) offers proactive, protocol-guided phone- and web-based caregiver support, guidance, and care coordination that extends the reach of dementia primary and specialty care. Care is delivered primarily via the phone and web by unlicensed Care Team Navigators (CTNs), who are trained and supervised by a team of dementia specialists with nursing, social work, and pharmacy expertise. Care Protocols guide proactive, quality care that is documented in the electronic health record (EHR).

The CTN is an unlicensed, trained dementia care guide who served as the PWD's and caregiver's primary point of contact to the program under nurse supervision. Care team navigators respond to caregivers' immediate needs first, then screen for common problems and provide personalized support and standardized education using the care plan protocols.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Dementia Management Quality Measurement Set
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
The rate of completion of a 10-item, adapted Dementia Management Quality Measurement Set. This count variable has a range of 0 (no dementia quality care elements completed) to 10 (all dementia quality care elements completed).
Baseline to 12 months
Change in emergency department (ED) visits
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Number of PWD ED visits, using claims and EHRs.
Baseline to 12 months
Change in potentially inappropriate medications for dementia or cognitive impairment
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Number of high-risk medications used, operationalized using the 2019 Beers criteria, using medication lists from the EHR.
Baseline to 12 months
Change in caregiver depression
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Caregiver depression will be measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), ranging from 0-27 points, with higher scores indicating more severe depression.
Baseline to 12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in PWD hospitalizations
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Number of PWD hospitalizations, using claims and EHRs.
Baseline to 12 months
Change in PWD annual bed days
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Number of PWD inpatient bed days, using claims and EHRs.
Baseline to 12 months
Change in central nervous system (CNS) acting medications
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Number of CNS acting medications to be avoided in persons with dementia, delirium, or a history of falls or fractures according to the 2019 Beers criteria, using medication lists from the EHR.
Baseline to 12 months
Change in caregiver burden
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
The Dementia Burden Scale-Caregiver (DBS-CG) is a composite of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-Q) for Distress, the Modified Caregiver Strain Index (MCSI), and and 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) with items transformed linearly to be on a 0-100 possible range and then averaged with higher scores indicating higher caregiver burden (Peipert et al., 2018).
Baseline to 12 months
Change in caregiver self-efficacy
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Caregiver self-efficacy score, as measured by a four-item survey with scores ranging from 5-20 points and higher scores indicating higher self-efficacy (Possin et al., 2019; Merrilees et al., 2018).
Baseline to 12 months
Change in caregiver anxiety
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Caregiver anxiety score, as measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), with scores ranging from 0-6 and higher scores indicating higher anxiety.
Baseline to 12 months

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Modifications of anti-dementia medications
Time Frame: Baseline to 12 months
Binary indicator of whether or not a participant's use of anti-dementia medications changed (i.e., started, stopped, or changed treatment with an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, and/or N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, memantine).
Baseline to 12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

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)

January 17, 2023

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2025

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 19, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 20, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

December 30, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

November 17, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 15, 2023

Last Verified

November 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Investigators will submit resource requests for archived data through a Qualtrics-based form, which will include a signed "Data Use Agreement". These will be reviewed monthly by the investigators. If a request is approved, the study staff will review the requested dataset to ensure it is de-identified and encrypted for transfer, along with a data dictionary.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Data requests will be accepted starting 12 months after study close with no end date.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Access to trial individual participant data (IPD) can be requested by qualified researchers engaging in independent scientific research, and will be provided following review and approval of a research proposal and Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) and execution of a Data Sharing Agreement (DSA).

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP
  • ICF
  • CSR

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 Dementia

Clinical Trials on Care Ecosystem

3
Subscribe