Reducing Uncertainty Distress in Long Term Health Conditions

January 15, 2023 updated by: Sarah Kay, Newcastle University

Piloting an Intervention Using Single Case Design to Reduce Uncertainty Distress in Those With Long Term Health Conditions

The goal of this pilot intervention study is to develop and test a new psychological therapy model in people with long term health conditions (rheumatic conditions) who are experiencing distress (anxiety or low mood) in relation to the uncertainty that their illness causes.

The main questions the study aims to answer are:

  1. Does the new treatment model help participants reduce uncertainty distress associated with their health condition?
  2. Is it a practical treatment that can be ran within a hospital setting?
  3. Is the treatment acceptable to participants?

Participants will be asked to attend weekly therapy sessions (up to a maximum of 16 sessions) in the hospital or via telehealth. The sessions will be based on the new treatment model and aimed at helping participants reduce uncertainty where they can and learn to live alongside it where it cannot be reduced. The hope is that if participants can better manage uncertainty this will reduce the distress (anxiety or low mood) that they feel.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Uncertainty is a natural part of chronic illness and is typically experienced as aversive for most people. Sources of uncertainty in illness can include living with ambiguous symptoms, unpredictability of flare ups, if/when the illness will worsen and how effective treatment will be. Whilst some real-world uncertainty is inevitable in illness, perceived uncertainty can be exacerbated by inconsistent and/or inadequate health information. High levels of illness uncertainty have been associated with greater emotional distress/mood disturbances, poorer adjustment and reduced quality of life.

Uncertainty management interventions have traditionally focused on reducing uncertainty through information management strategies. These have been shown to be effective in improving patient knowledge of their condition, improve patient-health professionals communication, mood and coping skills. Research into emotional disorders have identified uncertainty as a transdiagnostic source of distress and studies increasing tolerance of uncertainty have been shown to be effective.

To date there is no research combining informational interventions to reduce perceived uncertainty and interventions increasing tolerance of uncertainty in those with chronic health conditions. The aim of this study is pilot a transdiagnostic treatment model combining both elements. The intervention consists of 4 main interventional areas; information management, building safety, addressing overestimation of threat, and tolerating uncertainty. This treatment has the potential to reduce disease distress and burden and potentially reduce health care utilisation if patients are managing their health conditions and associated uncertainty better.

Using single case design this study will look to develop and evaluate the new treatment intervention. The aim is to establish whether his treatment is feasible and acceptable to be delivered within a health care setting.

Up to 6 participants will be recruited from the Rheumatology department within a hospital setting. Participants will be experiencing distress related to the uncertainty of their diagnosed health condition and willing to engage in a psychological treatment to reduce distress.

Treatment will consist of 16 weekly therapy sessions (dependent on clinical need) delivered face to face or via telehealth.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

6

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

      • Newcastle, United Kingdom, NE1 4LP
        • Royal Victoria Hospital (RVI)

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 to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosed with Long Term Health Condition (Rheumatic Disease)
  • Minimum of 12 months since diagnosis
  • Difficulties adjusting to long term health condition
  • Willingness to engage with a psychological treatment to manage distress associated with health condition
  • Fluent English Speaker

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Multiple long term health conditions
  • Progressive health conditions
  • Experiencing mental health difficulties that might interfere with ability to engage in time limited psychological therapy such as Major Depressive Episode and/or severe and enduring mental health problems, comorbid substance misuse, suicidality
  • Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
  • Non- English Speaker

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

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Reducing uncertainty distress: Psychological therapy intervention

Up to 16 sessions of psychological therapy delivered weekly either face to face or via telehealth . Based on empirically grounded models of anxiety/threat, illness uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty.

Formulation driven and clinically responsive individualised treatment based on four intervention areas: information management, building safety, reducing overestimation of threat and tolerating uncertainty.

Psychological therapy intervention based on elements of traditional Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) for anxiety, illness uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Changes in daily diary measures
Time Frame: Daily from baseline to follow up (approximately 24 weeks)
Idiosyncratic statements regarding uncertainty and distress rated on Likert scale. Minimum score 0, Maximum Score 10. Direction of improved scores are dependent on individual statements.
Daily from baseline to follow up (approximately 24 weeks)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Changes in Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ9) score
Time Frame: Baseline (Week 0), start of therapy (Week 2-4 depending on randomisation to baseline length) prior to each therapy session (weekly from weeks 2-4 to approximately weeks 18-20) end of therapy (approximately week 20) and follow up (approximately week 24)
Depression Questionnaire. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 27 (maximum). Lower scores indicate better outcome
Baseline (Week 0), start of therapy (Week 2-4 depending on randomisation to baseline length) prior to each therapy session (weekly from weeks 2-4 to approximately weeks 18-20) end of therapy (approximately week 20) and follow up (approximately week 24)
Changes in Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD7) score
Time Frame: Baseline (Week 0), start of therapy (Week 2-4 depending on randomisation to baseline length) prior to each therapy session (weekly from weeks 2-4 to approximately weeks 18-20) end of therapy (approximately week 20) and follow up (approximately week 24)
Anxiety Questionnaire. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 21 (maximum). Lower scores indicate better outcome.
Baseline (Week 0), start of therapy (Week 2-4 depending on randomisation to baseline length) prior to each therapy session (weekly from weeks 2-4 to approximately weeks 18-20) end of therapy (approximately week 20) and follow up (approximately week 24)
Changes in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI score)
Time Frame: At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Between week 2- week 4 dependent on randomisation to baseline) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Pain measure. Two subscales pain severity and pain interference. Lower scores indicate better outcome.
At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Between week 2- week 4 dependent on randomisation to baseline) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Changes in scores on Mishels Illness Uncertainty Scale Community version (MUIS-C)
Time Frame: At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Measure of illness uncertainty. Scores from 23 (minimum) to 115 (maximum). Lower scores indicate better outcome.
At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Changes in scores on Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS)- short form
Time Frame: At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Measure of intolerance of uncertainty. Scores from 12 (minimum) to 60 (maximum). Lower scores indicate better outcome.
At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Changes in scores on Intolerance of Uncertainty Behaviours in Everyday Life Questionnaire (IUBEL)
Time Frame: At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Measure of uncertainty behaviours. Two subscales generic and situational subscales. Scores from 0 (minimum) to 96 (maximum) on each subscale. Lower numbers indicate better outcome.
At 5 time points: Baseline (Week 0), Start of Treatment (Approximately week 4) , Mid treatment (Approximately week 12), End of treatment (Approximately week 20) and Follow up (Approximately week 24)
Changes in scores on International Adjustment Disorder Questionnaire (IADQ)
Time Frame: Pre and post treatment (Week 0 and approximately week 24)
Measure of adjustment to physical illness. Scores from 0 (minimum) to 40 (maximum). Lower numbers indicate better outcome.
Pre and post treatment (Week 0 and approximately week 24)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Study Director: Mark Freeston, ProfPsy, Newcastle University

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)

March 16, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 20, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

December 20, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 23, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 15, 2023

First Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 15, 2023

Last Verified

January 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • RES-21-015
  • 21/ES/0063 (Other Identifier: East of Scotland Research Ethics Service REC 1)
  • 293383 (Other Identifier: Integrated Research Application System (IRAS))

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 Rheumatic Diseases

Clinical Trials on Uncertainty distress model

Subscribe