- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT05784753
HEART Camp Connect -Promoting Exercise in Adults With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
HEART (Heart Failure Exercise and Resistance Training) Camp Connect: Promoting Adherence to Exercise in Adults With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Study Overview
Status
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The overall objectives for this study are to: (a) test the efficacy of virtual and in-person exercise interventions to promote long-term adherence to exercise; (b) determine a benchmark of exercise minutes that reaches a minimal clinically important difference in heart failure related health status and drives improvements in physical function, inflammatory markers, and patient-reported outcomes; (c) identify interventional mechanisms, interim clinical events and prognostic indicators of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) that mediate adherence; (d) assess delivery method and related cost of the intervention to support translation and scalability. To meet these objectives, investigators propose a three-group, 2-2-1 randomized repeated measures experimental design with 4 data collection points [baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months to compare HEART Camp, HEART Camp Connect, and virtual enhanced usual care (EUC).
This study begins with the cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) . The CPET is used to develop an exercise prescription and ensure participant safety and readiness for exercise. Participants who have completed a CPET within 6 months of enrollment with no changes in medications will not repeat the test. Any participants who exhibit potential safety concerns during CPET (e.g. cardiac arrhythmias, balance instability) will be evaluated by a trained providers, prior to continuing in the study. Those deemed unsafe to exercise will be withdrawn. After the CPET, participants will take part in the run-in period with 3 monitored sessions in cardiac rehabilitation and study orientation. All participants will be oriented during a one-time in-person training to familiarize them with the 1) Either in-person Engage center or Engage virtual platform via the HEART Camp You Tube channel; 2) All monitoring devices (Polar watch and Polar heart rate monitor, Actigraph, rating of perceived exertion scale, and exercise diary); and 3) Private HEART Camp You Tube channel where they can view investigator-developed educational videos specific to HFpEF and virtual exercise content. Participants who do not have a smart device with internet capability or have an insufficient data plan will be given a tablet with a wireless data plan for study use.
After randomization, participants in the intervention groups (HEART Camp Connect and HEART Camp) meet with a coach for the first 12 months of the study. The HEART Camp group will meet in-person at the medical fitness center with their coach. The HEART Camp Connect group will meet virtually, over videoconference. To improve the scalability of this intervention, investigators will taper coaching sessions according to the following schedule: Months 1-3 weekly, 1-on-1 coaching for 30 minutes; Months 4-12 1-on-1 coaching is reduced to 15 minute sessions every other week. On alternate weeks, participants will attend a 1-hour group-based exercise training and coaching. During these sessions, the coach will meet with 4-6 participants at once. One half of the class will be an exercise training session and the other half will be a question/answer session for participants to talk to the coach and each other about strategies for exercise. After 12 months, coaching (both intervention groups) and motivational messages (HEART Camp Connect only) will stop and participants will be expected to self-regulate exercise in months 13-18.
Participants will be asked to build up to 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise weekly. During exercise sessions, participants will be asked to wear their study-provided watch and heart rate monitor and keep a daily exercise diary.
Participants will meet with research personnel at 4 times during the study for data collection including where they will have their blood drawn and complete a 6 minute walk test. At these data collection time points, participants will also wear an activity monitor for 7 days/nights and complete surveys related to their heart failure and exercise.
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Windy W Alonso, PhD
- Phone Number: 402-559-8342
- Email: windy.alonso@unmc.edu
Study Locations
-
-
Nebraska
-
Omaha, Nebraska, United States, 68198-5330
- Recruiting
- University of Nebraska Medical Center
-
Contact:
- Windy W Alonso, PhD, RN
- Phone Number: 402-559-8342
- Email: windy.alonso@unmc.edu
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Diagnosis of heart failure with an ejection fraction greater than or equal to 50
- Echocardiogram in prior 24 months
- Stable pharmacologic therapy in the past 30 days
- Score greater than or equal to 6 on the heart failure with preserved ejection fraction algorithm or hemodynamic evidence of HFpEF
Exclusion Criteria:
- Life-limiting illness precluding study completion
- Clinical evidence of decompensated heart failure
- Unstable angina or marked shortness of breath on exertion at less than 2 metabolic equivalents
- Myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, or biventricular pacemaker in prior 6 weeks
- Orthopedic or neuromuscular disorders preventing aerobic exercise
- Cardiopulmonary exercise test results that preclude safe exercise
- Unwilling/unable to complete pre-randomization procedures
- Pregnancy
- Implantable cardioverter defibrillator
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: HEART Camp
Participants in the HEART Camp group will be provided paid, in-person access to the medical fitness center and in-person coaching by a trained coach.
|
Participants will meet with an in-person coach at the medical fitness center: Months 1-3 weekly for 30 minutes; Months 4-12 every other week for 15 minutes (on alternate weeks, participants will attend a 1-hour group-based exercise training and coaching).
|
Experimental: HEART Camp Connect
Participants in the HEART Camp Connect group will be provided paid, virtual access to the medical fitness center and virtual coaching by a trained coach via videoconference.
Participants will also receive automated, asynchronous motivational electronic messaging if they are below the weekly adherence threshold.
|
Participants will meet with a virtual coach from the medical fitness center via videoconferencing: Months 1-3 weekly for 30 minutes; Months 4-12 every other week for 15 minutes (on alternate weeks, participants will attend a virtual 1-hour group-based exercise training and coaching session via videoconferencing).
|
No Intervention: Enhanced Usual Care
Participants in the Enhanced Usual Care group will be provided paid virtual access to the medical fitness center and virtual availability of the medical fitness center staff and study personnel for participant-initiated questions.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Exercise Adherence
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Adherence is measured as weekly minutes of moderate intensity exercise as measured by a watch and heart rate sensor.
|
6 months
|
Exercise Adherence
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Adherence is measured as weekly minutes of moderate intensity exercise as measured by a watch and heart rate sensor.
|
12 months
|
Exercise Adherence
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Adherence is measured as weekly minutes of moderate intensity exercise as measured by a watch and heart rate sensor.
|
18 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Physical Function
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Physical function will be measured by distance in meters completed on the 6 minute walk test.
|
Baseline
|
Physical Function
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Physical function will be measured by distance in meters completed on the 6 minute walk test.
|
6 months
|
Physical Function
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Physical function will be measured by distance in meters completed on the 6 minute walk test.
|
12 months
|
Physical Function
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Physical function will be measured by distance in meters completed on the 6 minute walk test.
|
18 months
|
Health Status
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-Visual Analog Scale, Participants rate their perceived health status on a scale of 0-100 with 0 indicating the worst imaginable health state and 100 indicating the best imaginable health state
|
Baseline
|
Health Status
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-Visual Analog Scale, Participants rate their perceived health status on a scale of 0-100 with 0 indicating the worst imaginable health state and 100 indicating the best imaginable health state
|
6 months
|
Health Status
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-Visual Analog Scale, Participants rate their perceived health status on a scale of 0-100 with 0 indicating the worst imaginable health state and 100 indicating the best imaginable health state
|
12 months
|
Health Status
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-Visual Analog Scale, Participants rate their perceived health status on a scale of 0-100 with 0 indicating the worst imaginable health state and 100 indicating the best imaginable health state
|
18 months
|
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Time Frame: Baseline
|
CRP will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 1.33 Max 49,600
|
Baseline
|
C-reactive protein
Time Frame: 12 months
|
CRP will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 1.33 Max 49,600
|
12 months
|
Interleukin 1-Beta (IL1-beta)
Time Frame: Baseline
|
IL1-beta will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.05 Max 375
|
Baseline
|
Interleukin 1-Beta
Time Frame: 12 months
|
IL1-beta will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.05 Max 375
|
12 months
|
Interleukin 1-Alpha (IL1-alpha)
Time Frame: Baseline
|
IL1-alpha will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.09 Max 278
|
Baseline
|
Interleukin 1-Alpha
Time Frame: 12 months
|
IL1-alpha will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.09 Max 278
|
12 months
|
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-alpha)
Time Frame: Baseline
|
TNF-alpha will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.04 Max 248
|
Baseline
|
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
Time Frame: 12 months
|
TNF-alpha will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.04 Max 248
|
12 months
|
Tumor Necrosis Factor-beta
Time Frame: Baseline
|
TNF-beta will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.08 Max 458
|
Baseline
|
Tumor Necrosis Factor-beta
Time Frame: 12 months
|
TNF-beta will be measured from human plasma using the Mesoscale Discovery Human Biomarker Panel Unit pg/mL Min 0.08 Max 458
|
12 months
|
HF-related Health Status
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, assessing the domains of physical limitations, HF symptoms, quality of life, social impact of HF, and self efficacy.
A 23-item questionnaire where scores are generated for each domain and scaled from 0-100, with 0 denoting the worst and 100 the best possible status.
|
Baseline
|
HF-related Health Status
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, assessing the domains of physical limitations, HF symptoms, quality of life, social impact of HF, and self efficacy.
A 23-item questionnaire where scores are generated for each domain and scaled from 0-100, with 0 denoting the worst and 100 the best possible status.
|
6 months
|
HF-related Health Status
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, assessing the domains of physical limitations, HF symptoms, quality of life, social impact of HF, and self efficacy.
A 23-item questionnaire where scores are generated for each domain and scaled from 0-100, with 0 denoting the worst and 100 the best possible status.
|
12 months
|
HF-related Health Status
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, assessing the domains of physical limitations, HF symptoms, quality of life, social impact of HF, and self efficacy.
A 23-item questionnaire where scores are generated for each domain and scaled from 0-100, with 0 denoting the worst and 100 the best possible status.
|
18 months
|
Physical Activity
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Physical activity will be assessed based on data gathered from participants wearing an accelerometer for 7 days/nights.
|
Baseline
|
Physical Activity
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Physical activity will be assessed based on data gathered from participants wearing an accelerometer for 7 days/nights.
|
6 months
|
Physical Activity
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Physical activity will be assessed based on data gathered from participants wearing an accelerometer for 7 days/nights.
|
12 months
|
Physical Activity
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Physical activity will be assessed based on data gathered from participants wearing an accelerometer for 7 days/nights.
|
18 months
|
Dyspnea Severity
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Dyspnea Severity 10a, assessing severity of shortness of breath in response to different activities over the prior 7-day period.
10 items are assessed on a 4-point Likert scale with raw scores ranging from 0-30.
Higher scores indicate greater perceived dyspnea.
|
Baseline
|
Dyspnea Severity
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Dyspnea Severity 10a, assessing severity of shortness of breath in response to different activities over the prior 7-day period.
10 items are assessed on a 4-point Likert scale with raw scores ranging from 0-30.
Higher scores indicate greater perceived dyspnea.
|
6 months
|
Dyspnea Severity
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Dyspnea Severity 10a, assessing severity of shortness of breath in response to different activities over the prior 7-day period.
10 items are assessed on a 4-point Likert scale with raw scores ranging from 0-30.
Higher scores indicate greater perceived dyspnea.
|
12 months
|
Dyspnea Severity
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Dyspnea Severity 10a, assessing severity of shortness of breath in response to different activities over the prior 7-day period.
10 items are assessed on a 4-point Likert scale with raw scores ranging from 0-30.
Higher scores indicate greater perceived dyspnea.
|
18 months
|
Global Symptoms
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS-29 Profile v2.1 assessing physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbances, satisfaction with social role, pain impact, and pain intensity.
Pain intensity is assessed using a single 0-10 numeric rating, The 7 health domains are measured using 4 items per domain that are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale.
Each domain is scored separately with raw scores ranging from 4-20, higher scores indicate worse symptomatology.
|
Baseline
|
Global Symptoms
Time Frame: 6 months
|
PROMIS-29 Profile v2.1 assessing physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbances, satisfaction with social role, pain impact, and pain intensity.
Pain intensity is assessed using a single 0-10 numeric rating, The 7 health domains are measured using 4 items per domain that are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale.
Each domain is scored separately with raw scores ranging from 4-20, higher scores indicate worse symptomatology.
|
6 months
|
Global Symptoms
Time Frame: 12 months
|
PROMIS-29 Profile v2.1 assessing physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbances, satisfaction with social role, pain impact, and pain intensity.
Pain intensity is assessed using a single 0-10 numeric rating, The 7 health domains are measured using 4 items per domain that are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale.
Each domain is scored separately with raw scores ranging from 4-20, higher scores indicate worse symptomatology.
|
12 months
|
Global Symptoms
Time Frame: 18 months
|
PROMIS-29 Profile v2.1 assessing physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbances, satisfaction with social role, pain impact, and pain intensity.
Pain intensity is assessed using a single 0-10 numeric rating, The 7 health domains are measured using 4 items per domain that are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale.
Each domain is scored separately with raw scores ranging from 4-20, higher scores indicate worse symptomatology.
|
18 months
|
Health-related Quality of Life
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-5 Dimension, assessing the five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression.
5 items are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale and a summary index with a maximum score of 1 is derived from the 5 dimensions by conversion with a table of scores.
The maximum score of 1 indicates the best health state.
|
Baseline
|
Health-related Quality of Life
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-5 Dimension, assessing the five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression.
5 items are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale and a summary index with a maximum score of 1 is derived from the 5 dimensions by conversion with a table of scores.
The maximum score of 1 indicates the best health state.
|
6 months
|
Health-related Quality of Life
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-5 Dimension, assessing the five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression.
5 items are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale and a summary index with a maximum score of 1 is derived from the 5 dimensions by conversion with a table of scores.
The maximum score of 1 indicates the best health state.
|
12 months
|
Health-related Quality of Life
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Euro Qual (EQ)-5 Dimension, assessing the five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression.
5 items are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale and a summary index with a maximum score of 1 is derived from the 5 dimensions by conversion with a table of scores.
The maximum score of 1 indicates the best health state.
|
18 months
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Self-Efficacy
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Barriers Self-Efficacy Scale, assessing self-efficacy or confidence in exercising behavior.
13 items rated on a 100-point scale (each statement is scored on a 100-point percentage scale with 10-point increments.)
Higher score values indicated greater perceived self-efficacy.
|
Baseline
|
Self-Efficacy
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Barriers Self-Efficacy Scale, assessing self-efficacy or confidence in exercising behavior.
13 items rated on a 100-point scale (each statement is scored on a 100-point percentage scale with 10-point increments.)
Higher score values indicated greater perceived self-efficacy.
|
6 months
|
Self-Efficacy
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Barriers Self-Efficacy Scale, assessing self-efficacy or confidence in exercising behavior.
13 items rated on a 100-point scale (each statement is scored on a 100-point percentage scale with 10-point increments.)
Higher score values indicated greater perceived self-efficacy.
|
12 months
|
Self-Efficacy
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Barriers Self-Efficacy Scale, assessing self-efficacy or confidence in exercising behavior.
13 items rated on a 100-point scale (each statement is scored on a 100-point percentage scale with 10-point increments.)
Higher score values indicated greater perceived self-efficacy.
|
18 months
|
Outcome Expectations
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Multi-Dimensional Outcome Expectation for Exercise, 15-items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree to 5 (strongly agree), measuring 3 domains of outcome expectations for exercise.
High scores indicate a higher level of outcome expectations for exercise.
|
Baseline
|
Outcome Expectations
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Multi-Dimensional Outcome Expectation for Exercise, 15-items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree to 5 (strongly agree), measuring 3 domains of outcome expectations for exercise.
High scores indicate a higher level of outcome expectations for exercise.
|
6 months
|
Outcome Expectations
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Multi-Dimensional Outcome Expectation for Exercise, 15-items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree to 5 (strongly agree), measuring 3 domains of outcome expectations for exercise.
High scores indicate a higher level of outcome expectations for exercise.
|
12 months
|
Outcome Expectations
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Multi-Dimensional Outcome Expectation for Exercise, 15-items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree to 5 (strongly agree), measuring 3 domains of outcome expectations for exercise.
High scores indicate a higher level of outcome expectations for exercise.
|
18 months
|
Attitudes toward exercise
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Attitudes Toward Physical Activity/Exercise Scale, 14 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot), values range from 14-70 with higher scores indicating a more positive attitude.
|
Baseline
|
Attitudes toward exercise
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Attitudes Toward Physical Activity/Exercise Scale, 14 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot), values range from 14-70 with higher scores indicating a more positive attitude.
|
6 months
|
Attitudes toward exercise
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Attitudes Toward Physical Activity/Exercise Scale, 14 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot), values range from 14-70 with higher scores indicating a more positive attitude.
|
12 months
|
Attitudes toward exercise
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Attitudes Toward Physical Activity/Exercise Scale, 14 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot), values range from 14-70 with higher scores indicating a more positive attitude.
|
18 months
|
Self-Regulation
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale, 12 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very often), scores range from 12-60, with higher scores indicating greater use of self-regulatory strategies for physical activity.
|
Baseline
|
Self-Regulation
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale, 12 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very often), scores range from 12-60, with higher scores indicating greater use of self-regulatory strategies for physical activity.
|
6 months
|
Self-Regulation
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale, 12 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very often), scores range from 12-60, with higher scores indicating greater use of self-regulatory strategies for physical activity.
|
12 months
|
Self-Regulation
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale, 12 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very often), scores range from 12-60, with higher scores indicating greater use of self-regulatory strategies for physical activity.
|
18 months
|
Informational Support
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Informational Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived informational support.
|
Baseline
|
Informational Support
Time Frame: 6 months
|
PROMIS Informational Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived informational support.
|
6 months
|
Informational Support
Time Frame: 12 months
|
PROMIS Informational Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived informational support.
|
12 months
|
Informational Support
Time Frame: 18 months
|
PROMIS Informational Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived informational support.
|
18 months
|
Instrumental Support
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Instrumental Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived instrumental support.
|
Baseline
|
Instrumental Support
Time Frame: 6 months
|
PROMIS Instrumental Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived instrumental support.
|
6 months
|
Instrumental Support
Time Frame: 12 months
|
PROMIS Instrumental Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived instrumental support.
|
12 months
|
Instrumental Support
Time Frame: 18 months
|
PROMIS Instrumental Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived instrumental support.
|
18 months
|
Social Isolation
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Social Isolation Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating a higher perceived social isolation.
|
Baseline
|
Social Isolation
Time Frame: 6 months
|
PROMIS Social Isolation Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating a higher perceived social isolation.
|
6 months
|
Social Isolation
Time Frame: 12 months
|
PROMIS Social Isolation Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating a higher perceived social isolation.
|
12 months
|
Social Isolation
Time Frame: 18 months
|
PROMIS Social Isolation Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) with raw scores ranging from 4-20, and higher scores indicating a higher perceived social isolation.
|
18 months
|
Emotional Support
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always), with raw scores between 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived emotional support.
|
Baseline
|
Emotional Support
Time Frame: 6 months
|
PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always), with raw scores between 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived emotional support.
|
6 months
|
Emotional Support
Time Frame: 12 months
|
PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always), with raw scores between 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived emotional support.
|
12 months
|
Emotional Support
Time Frame: 18 months
|
PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form 4a, 4 items assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always), with raw scores between 4-20, and higher scores indicating greater perceived emotional support.
|
18 months
|
Types of Physical Activity
Time Frame: Baseline
|
International Physical Activity Questionnaire, 4-item questionnaire, 3 of the items have 1 possible subsequent item.
Answers are related to days per week and hours/minutes per day respondents perform an activity.
|
Baseline
|
Types of Physical Activity
Time Frame: 6 months
|
International Physical Activity Questionnaire, 4-item questionnaire, 3 of the items have 1 possible subsequent item.
Answers are related to days per week and hours/minutes per day respondents perform an activity.
|
6 months
|
Types of Physical Activity
Time Frame: 12 months
|
International Physical Activity Questionnaire, 4-item questionnaire, 3 of the items have 1 possible subsequent item.
Answers are related to days per week and hours/minutes per day respondents perform an activity.
|
12 months
|
Types of Physical Activity
Time Frame: 18 months
|
International Physical Activity Questionnaire, 4-item questionnaire, 3 of the items have 1 possible subsequent item.
Answers are related to days per week and hours/minutes per day respondents perform an activity.
|
18 months
|
Fatigue
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory - Short Form, 30 items assess on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely), possible values range from -24-96 with higher scores indicating a higher level of fatigue.
|
Baseline
|
Fatigue
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory - Short Form, 30 items assess on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely), possible values range from -24-96 with higher scores indicating a higher level of fatigue.
|
6 months
|
Fatigue
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory - Short Form, 30 items assess on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely), possible values range from -24-96 with higher scores indicating a higher level of fatigue.
|
12 months
|
Fatigue
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory - Short Form, 30 items assess on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely), possible values range from -24-96 with higher scores indicating a higher level of fatigue.
|
18 months
|
Cognitive Assessment
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 12 items measuring 7 cognitive domains, scores range from 0-30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function.
|
Baseline
|
Cognitive Assessment
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 12 items measuring 7 cognitive domains, scores range from 0-30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function.
|
6 months
|
Cognitive Assessment
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 12 items measuring 7 cognitive domains, scores range from 0-30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function.
|
12 months
|
Cognitive Assessment
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 12 items measuring 7 cognitive domains, scores range from 0-30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function.
|
18 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Windy W Alonso, PhD, University of Nebraska
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, Auricchio A, Bohm M, Dickstein K, Falk V, Filippatos G, Fonseca C, Gomez-Sanchez MA, Jaarsma T, Kober L, Lip GY, Maggioni AP, Parkhomenko A, Pieske BM, Popescu BA, Ronnevik PK, Rutten FH, Schwitter J, Seferovic P, Stepinska J, Trindade PT, Voors AA, Zannad F, Zeiher A; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2012 Jul;33(14):1787-847. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs104. Epub 2012 May 19. No abstract available. Erratum In: Eur Heart J. 2013 Jan;34(2):158.
- Virani SS, Alonso A, Aparicio HJ, Benjamin EJ, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, Carson AP, Chamberlain AM, Cheng S, Delling FN, Elkind MSV, Evenson KR, Ferguson JF, Gupta DK, Khan SS, Kissela BM, Knutson KL, Lee CD, Lewis TT, Liu J, Loop MS, Lutsey PL, Ma J, Mackey J, Martin SS, Matchar DB, Mussolino ME, Navaneethan SD, Perak AM, Roth GA, Samad Z, Satou GM, Schroeder EB, Shah SH, Shay CM, Stokes A, VanWagner LB, Wang NY, Tsao CW; American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2021 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021 Feb 23;143(8):e254-e743. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000950. Epub 2021 Jan 27.
- Fleg JL, Cooper LS, Borlaug BA, Haykowsky MJ, Kraus WE, Levine BD, Pfeffer MA, Pina IL, Poole DC, Reeves GR, Whellan DJ, Kitzman DW; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group. Exercise training as therapy for heart failure: current status and future directions. Circ Heart Fail. 2015 Jan;8(1):209-20. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.113.001420. No abstract available.
- Shah SJ, Borlaug BA, Kitzman DW, McCulloch AD, Blaxall BC, Agarwal R, Chirinos JA, Collins S, Deo RC, Gladwin MT, Granzier H, Hummel SL, Kass DA, Redfield MM, Sam F, Wang TJ, Desvigne-Nickens P, Adhikari BB. Research Priorities for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group Summary. Circulation. 2020 Mar 24;141(12):1001-1026. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.041886. Epub 2020 Mar 23.
- Pandey A, Parashar A, Kumbhani D, Agarwal S, Garg J, Kitzman D, Levine B, Drazner M, Berry J. Exercise training in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Circ Heart Fail. 2015 Jan;8(1):33-40. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.114.001615. Epub 2014 Nov 16.
- Pozehl BJ, Duncan K, Hertzog M, McGuire R, Norman JF, Artinian NT, Keteyian SJ. Study of adherence to exercise in heart failure: the HEART camp trial protocol. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2014 Nov 29;14:172. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-14-172.
- Pozehl BJ, McGuire R, Duncan K, Kupzyk K, Norman J, Artinian NT, Deka P, Krueger SK, Saval MA, Keteyian SJ. Effects of the HEART Camp Trial on Adherence to Exercise in Patients With Heart Failure. J Card Fail. 2018 Oct;24(10):654-660. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2018.06.007. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
- Warehime S, Dinkel D, Alonso W, Pozehl B. Long-term exercise adherence in patients with heart failure: A qualitative study. Heart Lung. 2020 Nov-Dec;49(6):696-701. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2020.08.016. Epub 2020 Aug 27.
- Alonso WW, Kupzyk K, Norman J, Bills SE, Bosak K, Dunn SL, Deka P, Pozehl B. Negative Attitudes, Self-efficacy, and Relapse Management Mediate Long-Term Adherence to Exercise in Patients With Heart Failure. Ann Behav Med. 2021 Oct 4;55(10):1031-1041. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaab002.
- Norman JF, Kupzyk KA, Artinian NT, Keteyian SJ, Alonso WS, Bills SE, Pozehl BJ. The influence of the HEART Camp intervention on physical function, health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety and fatigue in patients with heart failure. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Jan;19(1):64-73. doi: 10.1177/1474515119867444. Epub 2019 Aug 2.
- Keteyian SJ. Exercise training in congestive heart failure: risks and benefits. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2011 May-Jun;53(6):419-28. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2011.02.005.
- Pozehl BJ, Mcguire R, Duncan K, Hertzog M, Deka P, Norman J, Artinian NT, Saval MA, Keteyian SJ. Accelerometer-Measured Daily Activity Levels and Related Factors in Patients With Heart Failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018 Jul/Aug;33(4):329-335. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000464.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
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
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 0040-23-FB
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
IPD Sharing Time Frame
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- SAP
- CSR
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 HFpEF - Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
-
Occlutech International ABActive, not recruitingHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) | Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF)United States
-
Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustRecruitingHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United Kingdom
-
AstraZenecaCompletedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United States, Denmark, Italy, Canada, Korea, Republic of, Brazil, Slovakia, Japan, Bulgaria, South Africa, Sweden, Argentina
-
Novartis PharmaceuticalsTerminatedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)Japan
-
AstraZenecaParexelCompletedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United States
-
AstraZenecaCompletedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United States, Germany, Canada, Korea, Republic of, Austria, Slovakia, Australia, Bulgaria, Russian Federation, Argentina, Poland, Mexico
-
National Medical Research Center for Therapy and...RecruitingHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)Russian Federation
-
Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustUniversity College, London; Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; University of Leicester and other collaboratorsRecruitingHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United Kingdom
-
AstraZenecaCompletedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF)United States
-
I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityRecruitingColchicine | HFpEF - Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection FractionRussian Federation
Clinical Trials on HEART Camp
-
University of NebraskaCenter for Clinical and Translational Research (CCTR); Lexington Regional Health... and other collaboratorsCompleted
-
University of NebraskaCompletedHeart Failure With Preserved Ejection FractionUnited States
-
University of NebraskaNational Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)CompletedHeart FailureUnited States
-
University of NebraskaNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI); Wayne State University; Henry... and other collaboratorsCompletedHeart FailureUnited States
-
San Diego State UniversityRecruiting
-
University of MichiganMichigan State University; One Mind InstituteCompleted
-
Emory UniversityRecruiting
-
University of the Sciences in PhiladelphiaM.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Temple University; Dolfinger-McMahon Foundation; Genesis...Completed
-
Kelly TannerCompletedCerebral Palsy | Cerebral Palsy, Diplegic, InfantileUnited States
-
University of Alabama at BirminghamCompleted