Denne side blev automatisk oversat, og nøjagtigheden af ​​oversættelsen er ikke garanteret. Der henvises til engelsk version for en kildetekst.

Implementering af fælles beslutningstagning (SDM) for individualiseret CV-forebyggelse (SDM4IP) (SDM4IP)

27. juli 2026 opdateret af: Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Mayo Clinic
Kardiovaskulær (CV) sygdom er #1 årsag til for tidlig dødelighed og betydelig sygelighed i USA. På trods af kliniske retningslinjer implementeres de fleste kliniske indgreb hos personer med relativt lavere CV-risiko, og få blandt personer med den højeste risiko. Delt beslutningstagning (SDM) kan afbøde risiko-behandlingsparadokset ved at reducere risikoblindhed og manglende tilpasning af det forebyggende regime, men adoptionen af ​​SDM i rutinemæssig klinisk pleje er ufuldstændig. Denne undersøgelse omhandler SDM-adoption af et CV-forebyggende SDM-værktøj i tre sundhedssystemer.

Studieoversigt

Status

Afsluttet

Betingelser

Intervention / Behandling

Detaljeret beskrivelse

Den primære forebyggelse af kardiovaskulære (CV) hændelser er ofte mere intens hos individer med lavere risiko og omvendt (det såkaldte "risikobehandlingsparadoks"), delvis på grund af ubevidsthed om hver persons CV-risiko, om deres præferencer for forebyggende interventioner, og deres gennemførlighed i hver persons daglige liv. Retningslinjer for klinisk praksis anbefaler, at klinikere og patienter arbejder sammen for at nå frem til en effektiv og gennemførlig forebyggelsesplan, der er i overensstemmelse med hver persons CV-risiko og informerede præferencer, en proces kaldet delt beslutningstagning (SDM). På trods af tilgængeligheden af ​​et innovativt og effektivt værktøj, der estimerer CV-risiko, viser virkningen og funktionerne af tilgængelige livsstils- og farmakologiske forebyggende interventioner og dermed kan lette CV-behandlingsdiskussioner mellem klinikere og patienter, sker denne type SDM ikke rutinemæssigt i praksis.

Udfordringen er derfor at identificere strategier til at øge adoptionen af ​​denne type SDM i klinisk praksis i den virkelige verden. Denne 4-årige undersøgelse - foreslået af et tværfagligt team med ekspertise inden for forebyggende kardiologi, SDM og implementeringsvidenskab - har til formål at integrere et SDM-værktøj (CV Prevention Choice-værktøjet) i primærplejepraksis i tre forskellige sundhedssystemer i USA. og studere både værktøjet og skræddersyede strategier, der fremmer dets vedtagelse og rutinemæssige brug. Undersøgelsen vil bruge en blandet metode, hybrid implementeringseffektivitet (Type III) trin-kile klynget randomiseret forsøgsdesign til at bestemme:

  • Implementeringseffektivitet (Mål 1) ved at evaluere de indstillinger (herunder lokale arbejdsgange og politikker), hvori CV Prevention Choice-værktøjet er implementeret, og brugernes engagement i implementeringsstrategier; implementeringsresultater (f.eks. rækkevidde, vedtagelse) forbundet med disse strategier; og hvordan implementering fremmer rutinemæssig vedtagelse af SDM og CV Prevention Choice-værktøjet i primærplejepraksis, og
  • SDM-effektivitet (Mål 2) estimeret ud fra, i hvilket omfang individuelle CV-forebyggelsesplaner er gennemførlige og i overensstemmelse med hver persons estimerede CV-risiko og præferencer.

Efterforskerne antager, at bestræbelser på at vurdere lokale behov og bruge dem til at udvikle skræddersyede implementeringstilgange vil fremme en større anvendelse af SDM i praksis. De antager yderligere, at individuelle forebyggende plejeplaner vil være i overensstemmelse med estimeret risiko, når klinikere anvender SDM-værktøjet. Det overordnede mål er at fremme patientcentreret pleje, der effektivt reducerer den betydelige byrde af CV-sygdom blandt amerikanere. Ved projektets afslutning forventer efterforskerne at have (a) identificeret de mest effektive implementeringsstrategier til at indlejre SDM i rutinepraksis og (b) estimeret effektiviteten af ​​SDM til at opnå gennemførlig og risikooverensstemmende CV-forebyggelse i primærpleje.

Undersøgelsestype

Interventionel

Tilmelding (Faktiske)

112127

Fase

  • Ikke anvendelig

Kontakter og lokationer

Dette afsnit indeholder kontaktoplysninger for dem, der udfører undersøgelsen, og oplysninger om, hvor denne undersøgelse udføres.

Studiesteder

    • Georgia
      • Marietta, Georgia, Forenede Stater, 30060
        • Wellstar Health System
    • Minnesota
      • Rochester, Minnesota, Forenede Stater, 55905
        • Mayo Clinic
    • North Dakota
      • Grand Forks, North Dakota, Forenede Stater, 58201
        • Altru Health System
    • Virginia
      • Arlington, Virginia, Forenede Stater, 22205
        • VHC Health

Deltagelseskriterier

Forskere leder efter personer, der passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kaldet berettigelseskriterier. Nogle eksempler på disse kriterier er en persons generelle helbredstilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Berettigelseskriterier

Aldre berettiget til at studere

40 år til 75 år (Voksen, Ældre voksen)

Tager imod sunde frivillige

Ingen

Beskrivelse

Inklusionskriterier:

  • Klinikerdeltagere: Alle klinikere, der er tilknyttet en deltagende primærplejepraksis og pleje af voksne patienter, der er berettiget til CV-forebyggelse, vil blive inviteret til at deltage.
  • Patientdeltagere: Voksne patienter (i alderen 40-75 år) med eller uden diabetes, som ikke har oplevet en aterotrombotisk klinisk hændelse og modtager forebyggende behandling i en deltagende primærplejepraksis, vil være berettiget til at deltage.

Ekskluderingskriterier:

- Personer, der ikke taler engelsk eller har nogen form for kognitivt underskud, der kan påvirke deres evne til at give samtykke til at deltage i undersøgelsen, vil ikke blive inviteret til at deltage.

Studieplan

Dette afsnit indeholder detaljer om studieplanen, herunder hvordan undersøgelsen er designet, og hvad undersøgelsen måler.

Hvordan er undersøgelsen tilrettelagt?

Design detaljer

  • Primært formål: Sundhedstjenesteforskning
  • Tildeling: Randomiseret
  • Interventionel model: Crossover opgave
  • Maskning: Ingen (Åben etiket)

Våben og indgreb

Deltagergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandling
Andet: Sequence 1
Sequence 1 began usual care (Step 1) on 9/24/2021, entered the active implementation period (Step 2) on 3/24/2022, and entered the maintenance period (Step 3) on 4/1/2024. In usual care, clinicans had access to CV Prevention Choice in their electronic health record but there were no other active implementation strategies deployed (passive implementation). The active implementation period included deployment of tailored implementaiton strategies. In the maintenance period, active implementation support ended but clinicians still had access to CV Prevention Choice in the EHR
CV Prevention Choice SDM-værktøjet er en fælles beslutningstagning. Den er indlejret i den elektroniske patientjournal og bruger EPJ-data til at estimere og vise kardiovaskulær risiko for individuelle patienter og derefter fremme samtaler mellem klinikere og patienter om tilgængelige muligheder for forebyggende behandling baseret på individuelle risici og præferencer.
Andet: Sequence 2
Sequence 2 began usual care (Step 1) on 4/13/2022, entered the active implementation period (Step 2) on 10/14/2022, and entered the maintenance period (Step 3) on 4/1/2024. In usual care, clinicans had access to CV Prevention Choice in their electronic health record but there were no other active implementation strategies deployed (passive implementation). The active implementation period included deployment of tailored implementaiton strategies. In the maintenance period, active implementation support ended but clinicians still had access to CV Prevention Choice in the EHR.
CV Prevention Choice SDM-værktøjet er en fælles beslutningstagning. Den er indlejret i den elektroniske patientjournal og bruger EPJ-data til at estimere og vise kardiovaskulær risiko for individuelle patienter og derefter fremme samtaler mellem klinikere og patienter om tilgængelige muligheder for forebyggende behandling baseret på individuelle risici og præferencer.
Under den aktive implementeringsfase vil sundhedssystemerne implementere skræddersyet implementeringsfacilitering og andre skræddersyede implementeringsstrategier, der sigter mod at øge vedtagelsen og brugen af ​​fælles beslutningstagning ved hjælp af CV Prevention Choice.
Andet: Sequence 3
Sequence 3 began usual care (Step 1) on 6/13/2022, entered the active implementation period (Step 2) on 12/13/2022, and entered the maintenance period (Step 3) on 4/1/2024. In usual care, clinicans had access to CV Prevention Choice in their electronic health record but there were no other active implementation strategies deployed (passive implementation). The active implementation period included deployment of tailored implementaiton strategies. In the maintenance period, active implementation support ended but clinicians still had access to CV Prevention Choice in the EHR.
CV Prevention Choice SDM-værktøjet er en fælles beslutningstagning. Den er indlejret i den elektroniske patientjournal og bruger EPJ-data til at estimere og vise kardiovaskulær risiko for individuelle patienter og derefter fremme samtaler mellem klinikere og patienter om tilgængelige muligheder for forebyggende behandling baseret på individuelle risici og præferencer.

Hvad måler undersøgelsen?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Reach (RE-AIM): The Percentage of Clinicians Who Ever Used CV Prevention Choice
Tidsramme: Approximately 3.5 years
Percentage of clinicians who used CV Prevention Choice, among all eligible clinicians in participating settings. Clinicians were eligible if they had at least one encounter during the period evaluated. Utilization was recorded in the electronic health record. Higher percentages indicate greater intervention reach.
Approximately 3.5 years
Effectiveness (RE-AIM): Clinician Perceptions of CV Prevention Choice Effectiveness
Tidsramme: Approximately 3.5 years
Perceptions of CV Prevention Choice effectiveness, including whether it helps support shared decision making conversations, as assessed through interviews with eligible clinicians. Participant counts reflect the number of interview participants in the arm/group who indicated CV Prevention Choice supports shared decision making, does not support shared decision making, or were unsure whether it supported shared decision making.
Approximately 3.5 years
Adoption (RE-AIM): The Percentage of Clinicians Who Adopted CV Prevention Choice in Routine Care
Tidsramme: Approximately 3.5 years
Percentage of eligible clinicians that used CV Prevention Choice in encounters identified in the electronic health record as a visit for preventive care (visit reason listed as annual exam or annual wellness visit), among all eligible preventive care encounters. Utilization was recorded in the electronic health record. Higher percentages indicate greater adoption.
Approximately 3.5 years
Adoption (RE-AIM): Clinician Perceptions of CV Prevention Choice Adoption
Tidsramme: Approximately 3.5 years
Perceptions of CV Prevention Choice adoption, including reasons for adopting it or failing to adopt it in routine care, as assessed through interviews with eligible clinicians. Participant counts reflect the number of interview participants in the arm/group who gave reasons for adopting or not adopting CV Prevention Choice.
Approximately 3.5 years
Implementation (RE-AIM): Observer Scoring of Clinician Fidelity to Shared Decision Making Behaviors in Audio-video Recorded Encounters
Tidsramme: Approximately 1 year
A sample of clinical encounters were audio-video recorded, reviewed by trained study staff, and scored using a fidelity checklist with 10 items indicating shared decision making behaviors. Each item was scored on a on a scale from -1=Behavior was undermined by comment or action to 4=The behavior is exhibited to a very high standard. An overall average score ranging from -1 to 4 was created by averaging the 10 item scores. A higher mean score indicates greater fidelity to the core components of shared decision making.
Approximately 1 year
Implementation (RE-AIM): Average Patient-reported Rating of the Quality of Shared Decision Making After a Clinical Encounter
Tidsramme: Approximately 1 year
The quality of shared decision making was assessed using the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9), which is a patient self-report measure designed to measure the extent and quality of shared decision making in a clinical encounter from the patient perspective. The nine items are scored on a 6-point Likert scale from 1 (Completely Disagree) to 6 (Completely Agree). Scores are summed and transformed to a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating greater perceived involvement in decision-making.
Approximately 1 year
Implementation (RE-AIM): Average Patient-reported Quality of Care After a Clinical Encounter
Tidsramme: Approximately 1 year
The quality of care was assessed using the 10-item Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure, which is a patient-reported measure of the experience of care in a clinical encounter. Higher scores are indicative of higher patient reported relational empathy in the consultation. Items are scored from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent) and summed for a range of scores from 10 to 50. Higher scores indicate more positive assessment of care processes.
Approximately 1 year
Maintenance (RE-AIM): The Percentage of Clinicians Using CV Prevention Choice at the End of the Maintenance Period Compared to the Beginning of the Period
Tidsramme: Approximately 1 year
The percentage of clinicians using CV Prevention Choice, as indicated in the electronic health record, at the transition to the maintenance period was compared to the percentage in the last two months of the maintenance phase. Equivalent or higher percentage use at the end of the maintenance stage indicates maintenance of the tool as part of routine practice.
Approximately 1 year
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of How CV Prevention Choice Differs From Usual Ways of Working
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "I can see how it differs from usual ways of working" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Whether CV Prevention Choice Has Potential Value for Their Work
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "I can see the potential value of it for my own work" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Whether There Are Key People to Drive CV Prevention Choice Forward and Get Others Involved
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "There are key people who drive it forward and get others involved" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Whether CV Prevention Choice Can be Easily Integrated Into Existing Work
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "I can easily integrate it into my existing work" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Whether Sufficient Training Was Provided to Implement CV Prevention Choice
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "Sufficient training is provided to enable staff to implement it" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Management Support for CV Prevention Choice
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "Management adequately supports it" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years
Maintenance (RE-AIM): Clinician Self-reported Perception of Whether Staff Agree CV Prevention Choice is Worthwhile
Tidsramme: Approximately 3 years
Seven items from the 23-item Normalization Measure Development Questionnaire (NoMAD) were administered to clinicians to assess the extent to which CV Prevention Choice had become a routine part of their practice (i.e., normalized in practice). The item "The staff agree that it is worthwhile" was scored on a Likert scale from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree. Higher levels of agreement indicate higher levels of normalization of CV Prevention Choice into routine care.
Approximately 3 years

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Effectiveness: The Predicted Marginal Probability of Statin Use is Concordant With Estimated Cardiovascular Risk
Tidsramme: Approximately 4 years
Patient risk-concordance was assessed using all of the patient's encounter level data. Statin prescription status was captured in the EHR up to 30 days after the encounter (i.e., the patient-clinician clinical visit) and their estimated 10-year risk of developing a first atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event, calculated using the Pooled Cohort Equation and data from the EHR including: age, race, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, diabetes status, and whether the individual is receiving treatment for high blood pressure (if systolic blood pressure is greater than 120 mmHg). Risk concordance was defined as having a statin prescription in groups where ASCVD risk was > or equal to 7.5% and not having a statin prescription if it was < 7.5%. The least square means, using the patient's encounter level data, provides a marginal probability of the proportion of patients that would have a statin prescription within the risk*arm/group.
Approximately 4 years

Samarbejdspartnere og efterforskere

Det er her, du vil finde personer og organisationer, der er involveret i denne undersøgelse.

Sponsor

Samarbejdspartnere

Efterforskere

  • Ledende efterforsker: Jennifer Ridgeway, PhD, Mayo Clinic
  • Ledende efterforsker: Victor Montori, MD, Mayo Clinic

Publikationer og nyttige links

Den person, der er ansvarlig for at indtaste oplysninger om undersøgelsen, leverer frivilligt disse publikationer. Disse kan handle om alt relateret til undersøgelsen.

Hjælpsomme links

Datoer for undersøgelser

Disse datoer sporer fremskridtene for indsendelser af undersøgelsesrekord og resumeresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieregistreringer og rapporterede resultater gennemgås af National Library of Medicine (NLM) for at sikre, at de opfylder specifikke kvalitetskontrolstandarder, før de offentliggøres på den offentlige hjemmeside.

Studer store datoer

Studiestart (Faktiske)

10. maj 2021

Primær færdiggørelse (Faktiske)

31. december 2024

Studieafslutning (Faktiske)

29. april 2025

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først indsendt

22. juni 2020

Først indsendt, der opfyldte QC-kriterier

24. juni 2020

Først opslået (Faktiske)

30. juni 2020

Opdateringer af undersøgelsesjournaler

Sidste opdatering sendt (Faktiske)

29. juli 2026

Sidste opdatering indsendt, der opfyldte kvalitetskontrolkriterier

27. juli 2026

Sidst verificeret

1. juli 2026

Mere information

Begreber relateret til denne undersøgelse

Andre undersøgelses-id-numre

  • 20-002772
  • R01HL151662-01 (U.S. NIH-bevilling/kontrakt)

Plan for individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)

Planlægger du at dele individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)?

INGEN

Lægemiddel- og udstyrsoplysninger, undersøgelsesdokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret lægemiddelprodukt

Ingen

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret enhedsprodukt

Ingen

produkt fremstillet i og eksporteret fra U.S.A.

Ingen

Disse oplysninger blev hentet direkte fra webstedet clinicaltrials.gov uden ændringer. Hvis du har nogen anmodninger om at ændre, fjerne eller opdatere dine undersøgelsesoplysninger, bedes du kontakte register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ændring er implementeret på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også blive opdateret automatisk på vores hjemmeside .