Esta página foi traduzida automaticamente e a precisão da tradução não é garantida. Por favor, consulte o versão em inglês para um texto fonte.

A ferramenta "vamos conversar" para apoiar a tomada de decisões sobre o uso da tecnologia

21 de setembro de 2026 atualizado por: Clara Berridge, University of Washington

Estudo mecanicista da intervenção diádica "vamos conversar sobre tecnologia" para apoiar a tomada de decisões sobre o uso da tecnologia

The goal of this research is to educate people about different technologies to support care at home when someone is experiencing memory difficulties. "Let's Talk Tech" is a new tool to educate people about technologies commonly used to support care and monitor safety, and help families talk about their feelings about them to understand each other's perspectives. The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if "Let's Talk Tech" helps people feel more prepared to make decisions about technologies.

Researchers will compare Let's Talk Tech to usual care (no intervention) to see if Let's Talk Tech increases peoples' preparedness and confidence to make decisions about technologies.

All participants will:

  • Use the Let's Talk Tech web application together with their study partner that takes up to an hour or do nothing.
  • Complete two surveys. The second survey will be taken within 2 weeks of the first.

One participant in each pair will also take a 3rd short survey 3 months after the first.

Visão geral do estudo

Status

Concluído

Intervenção / Tratamento

Descrição detalhada

The goal of this research is to help families understand digital health technology options to support dementia care at home so they can negotiate immediate decisions and future use in an informed way. This is a mechanism-focused trial of Let's Talk Tech (LTT), a single-use, self-administered intervention in the form of a web application. It targets education and interpersonal communication processes to enable informed decision making and planning for technology use that relieves care partners of the burden of making decisions without awareness of the person's preferences. Participants are people living with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementias (PLWD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and a care partner. The 120 enrolled dyads (60 per study group) will be randomly assigned to receive either the intervention or usual care control. The intervention is self-administered. All participants will complete measures at baseline and at post-test (2 weeks), and care partners will also complete them 3 months later. Aim 1 will test if LTT compared with usual care improves the hypothesized mechanisms of change that are care partners' technology awareness, understanding, communication satisfaction, and intention to honor the PLWD/MCI's preferences, as well as both care partner- and PLWD/MCI-reported dyadic alignment. Aim 2 will examine if and how those hypothesized mechanisms of change improve the post-test and 3-month primary outcomes of care partner preparedness, decisional conflict, and decision making confidence, and secondary outcomes of PLWD/MCI and care partner sharing of technology preferences beyond the dyad and their confidence that PLWD/MCI's preferences will be honored. Exploratory Aim 3 will examine how, with whom, and for what purpose dyad members share technology preferences and explore factors that vary for those who shared with providers vs. family/friends, with the hope of learning how to expand the reach of this intervention to activate dyads' entire care networks.

Tipo de estudo

Intervencional

Inscrição (Real)

222

Estágio

  • Não aplicável

Contactos e Locais

Esta seção fornece os detalhes de contato para aqueles que conduzem o estudo e informações sobre onde este estudo está sendo realizado.

Locais de estudo

    • Washington
      • Seattle, Washington, Estados Unidos, 98105
        • University of Washington

Critérios de participação

Os pesquisadores procuram pessoas que se encaixem em uma determinada descrição, chamada de critérios de elegibilidade. Alguns exemplos desses critérios são a condição geral de saúde de uma pessoa ou tratamentos anteriores.

Critérios de elegibilidade

Idades elegíveis para estudo

18 anos e mais velhos (Adulto, Adulto mais velho)

Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis

Não

Gêneros Elegíveis para o Estudo

Tudo

Descrição

Inclusion Criteria for Patients:

  • have mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia
  • age 55 or older
  • able to understand and speak English

Inclusion Criteria for Co-participants:

  • be identified by the patient as their primary support person
  • age 18 or older
  • able to understand and speak English
  • able to complete LTT together with their study partner at the same time

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Plano de estudo

Esta seção fornece detalhes do plano de estudo, incluindo como o estudo é projetado e o que o estudo está medindo.

Como o estudo é projetado?

Detalhes do projeto

  • Finalidade Principal: Outro
  • Alocação: Randomizado
  • Modelo Intervencional: Atribuição Paralela
  • Mascaramento: Nenhum (rótulo aberto)

Armas e Intervenções

Grupo de Participantes / Braço
Intervenção / Tratamento
Experimental: Let's Talk Tech intervention

The intervention group will complete the single use self-administered Let's Talk Tech intervention together as a dyad.

Let's Talk Tech is a self-administered dyadic education and communication tool delivered as a web application to support shared decision making about technology use.

Sem intervenção: Usual care

This control group will receive usual care, which means they will complete no intervention.

O que o estudo está medindo?

Medidas de resultados primários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Preparedness to make technology decisions
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

This is one of the three primary outcomes that are not mechanisms of change variables. Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1="Strongly agree" to 5="Strongly disagree"] how much they agree with the statement that they feel prepared to make decisions about technology use for their study partner.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months
Decisional Conflict Scale
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

This is one of the three primary outcomes that are not mechanisms of change variables. The Decisional Conflict Scale is a 16-item scale with 5 response categories [0= "Strongly agree" to 4="Strongly disagree"]. Higher scores reflect higher decisional conflict in decision making.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months
Decision Making Confidence Scale (adapted)
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

This is one of the three primary outcomes that are not mechanisms of change variables. This is a six-item scale with 5 response categories [0="Not confident at all" to 4= "Very confident"]. Higher scores reflect higher confidence in decision making.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months
Technology awareness
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1="Very aware" to 5="Very unaware"] how aware they are about technologies available to support their partner's care and safety.

baseline and 2-week post-test
Technology understanding
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

4 items assess perceived understanding of each of 4 technologies featured in the intervention [1="Not at all" to 5="Completely"].

baseline and 2-week post-test
Perception of PLWD/MCI's technology understanding
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

4 items assess care partner's perception of how well their study partner understands of each of 4 technologies featured in the intervention [1="Not at all" to 5="Completely"].

baseline and 2-week post-test
Satisfaction with dyadic communication about technology
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1="Very satisfied" to 5="Very dissatisfied"] how satisfied they are with their discussion with their study partner about using technology to support their care or safety.

baseline and 2-week post-test
Intention to honor preferences
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1="Very likely" to 5="Very unlikely"] how likely they are to honor their partner's preferences for how technology is used in their care.

baseline and 2-week post-test
Dyadic alignment about technology use
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

Participant is asked how much they agree with their partner about using technologies to support their care [1="Not at all" to 5="Completely"].

baseline and 2-week post-test
Had conversation about technology
Prazo: baseline and 2-week post-test

Participant answers yes, no or unsure if they've ever had a conversation with their study partner about technology to support care or safety.

baseline and 2-week post-test

Medidas de resultados secundários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Shared technology preferences
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

Participant answer yes or no if they have ever shared the PLWD/MCI's preferences about technologies to support their care with anyone else.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months
Confidence preferences will be honored
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1=Strongly agree to 5=Strongly disagree] about their belief the PLWD/MCI's choices about these technologies will be honored.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months
Satisfaction with involvement of primary participant in technology use decisions
Prazo: baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

Participant rates on a 5-point Likert scale [1="Very satisfied" to 5="Very dissatisfied"] how satisfied they are with how involved the primary participant is in decisions about technology to support their care.

baseline, 2-week post-test and 3 months

Colaboradores e Investigadores

É aqui que você encontrará pessoas e organizações envolvidas com este estudo.

Investigadores

  • Investigador principal: Clara Berridge, PhD, University of Washington

Datas de registro do estudo

Essas datas acompanham o progresso do registro do estudo e os envios de resumo dos resultados para ClinicalTrials.gov. Os registros do estudo e os resultados relatados são revisados ​​pela National Library of Medicine (NLM) para garantir que atendam aos padrões específicos de controle de qualidade antes de serem publicados no site público.

Datas Principais do Estudo

Início do estudo (Real)

7 de fevereiro de 2025

Conclusão Primária (Real)

25 de agosto de 2026

Conclusão do estudo (Real)

25 de agosto de 2026

Datas de inscrição no estudo

Enviado pela primeira vez

3 de janeiro de 2025

Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ

7 de fevereiro de 2025

Primeira postagem (Real)

10 de fevereiro de 2025

Atualizações de registro de estudo

Última Atualização Postada (Real)

25 de setembro de 2026

Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade

21 de setembro de 2026

Última verificação

1 de agosto de 2026

Mais Informações

Termos relacionados a este estudo

Informações sobre medicamentos e dispositivos, documentos de estudo

Estuda um medicamento regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA

Não

Estuda um produto de dispositivo regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA

Não

Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .

Se inscrever