Great expectations: A multisite, randomized controlled open‐label trial of a novel patient expectations communication tool
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chapman J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11227275 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patient's posture change is commonly employed by a colonoscopist to achieve complete examination. We studied whether patient's posture (left-lateral decubitus vs supine) influenced the success rate of ileal intubation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective open-label randomized study performed in the Endoscopy Suite of a tertiary-care center, all adult outpatients referred for colonoscopy, in whom cecal intubation was achieved and who satisfied predefined inclusion criteria, were randomized to undergo ileal intubation in either of the above two postures. Colonoscopy (EC-201 WL, Fujinon) was performed after overnight poly-ethylene-glycol preparation, under conscious sedation and continuous pulse-oxymetry monitoring. After confirming cecal intubation, patients were randomized for ileal intubation. Success was defined by visualization of ileal mucosa or villi (confirmed by digital photography) and was attempted until limited by pain and/or time of ≥ 6 min. RESULTS: Of 320 eligible patients, 217 patients (150 males) were randomized, 106 to left-lateral decubitus and 111 to supine posture. At baseline, the two groups were evenly matched. Successful ileal intubation was achieved in 145 (66.8 %) patients overall, significantly higher in the supine posture (74.8 % versus 58.5 %; P = 0.014). On multivariate analysis, supine posture (P = 0.02), average/good right-colon preparation (P < 0.01), non-thin-lipped ileocecal (IC) valve (P < 0.001) and younger age (P = 0.02) were independent predictors of success. Positive ileal findings were recorded in 13 (9 %) patients. CONCLUSION: Ileoscopy is more successful in supine than in left-lateral decubitus posture. Age, bowel preparation and type of IC valve also determine success.
| S-EPMC4423309 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionStories may be an effective tool to communicate with patients because of their ability to engage the reader. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of story booklets compared to standard information sheets for parents of children attending the emergency department (ED) with a child with croup.MethodsParents were randomized to receive story booklets (n=208) or standard information sheets (n=205) during their ED visit. The primary outcome was change in anxiety between triage to ED discharge as measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Follow-up telephone interviews were conducted at 1 and 3 days after discharge, then every other day until 9 days (or until resolution of symptoms), and at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included: expected future anxiety, event impact, parental knowledge, satisfaction, decision regret, healthcare utilization, time to symptom resolution.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the primary outcome of change in parental anxiety between recruitment and ED discharge (change of 5 points for the story group vs. 6 points for the comparison group, p=0.78). The story group showed significantly greater decision regret regarding their decision to go to the ED (p<0.001): 6.7% of the story group vs. 1.5% of the comparison group strongly disagreed with the statement "I would go for the same choice if I had to do it over again". The story group reported shorter time to resolution of symptoms (mean 3.7 days story group vs. 4.0 days comparison group, median 3 days both groups; log rank test, p=0.04). No other outcomes were different between study groups.ConclusionsStories about parent experiences managing a child with croup did not reduce parental anxiety. The story group showed significantly greater decision regret and quicker time to resolution of symptoms. Further research is needed to better understand whether stories can be effective in improving patient-important outcomes.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials, ISRCTN39642997 (http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN39642997).
| S-EPMC3808406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) provides satisfactory postoperative pain therapy, but its effect has not been assessed in acute pancreatitis (AP). Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous hydromorphone PCA for pain relief in AP. Methods: This open-label trial included AP patients admitted within 72 h of symptom onset, aged 18-70 years old, and with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain intensity ≥5. They were randomized to receive intravenous hydromorphone PCA (0.05 mg/h with 0.2 mg on-demand) or intramuscular pethidine (50 mg as required) for three consecutive days. Intramuscular dezocine (5 mg on demand) was the rescue analgesia. The primary outcome was the change of VAS score recorded every 4 h for 3 days. Interim analysis was conducted by an Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (IDSMC). Results: From 26 July 2019 to 15 January 2020, 77 patients were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis in the interim analysis (39 in the hydromorphone group and 38 in the pethidine group). Baseline parameters were comparable between groups. No difference in VAS between the two groups was found. Hydromorphone PCA was associated with higher moderately severe to severe cases (82.1% vs. 55.3%, p = 0.011), acute peripancreatic fluid collections (53.9% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.027), more cumulative opioid consumption (median 46.7 vs. 5 mg, p < 0.001), higher analgesia costs (median 85.5 vs. 0.5 $, p < 0.001) and hospitalization costs (median 3,778 vs. 2,273 $, p = 0.007), and more adverse events (20.5% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.087). The per-protocol analysis did not change the results. Although a sample size of 122 patients was planned, the IDSMC halted further recruitment as disease worsening or worse clinical outcomes between the groups in the interim analysis. Conclusion: Hydromorphone PCA was not superior to pethidine in relieving pain in AP patients and might have worse clinical outcomes. Therefore, its use is not recommended. Clinical Trial Registration: Chictr.org.cn. ChiCTR1900025971.
| S-EPMC9387897 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigated the efficacy of an open-label placebo (OLP) treatment for menopausal hot flushes. Women with at least five moderate or severe hot flushes per day were allocated to receive four weeks of OLP for twice a day or no-treatment. Intention-to-treat analyses included n = 100 women. In comparison to no-treatment, OLP reduced the log-transformed hot flush composite score (frequency × intensity) (mean difference in change: - 0.32, 95% CI [- 0.43; - 0.21], p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.86), hot flush frequency (- 1.12 [- 1.81; - 0.43], p = 0.02, Cohen's d = 0.51), and improved overall menopause-related quality of life (- 2.53 [- 4.17; - 0.89], p = 0.02, Cohen's d = 0.49). Twelve (24%) (vs. three [6%]) patients had 50% lesser hot flushes. Problem rating of hot flushes and subdomains of quality of life did not improve. After four weeks, the OLP group was further divided via randomization to continue or discontinue the treatment. Benefits were maintained at week 8 (log-transformed score: - 0.04 [- 0.06; 0.14], p = 0.45). There was no difference between taking placebos for 8 or 4 weeks (log-transformed score: 0.04 [- 0.17; 0.25], p = 0.73). Results indicate that open-label placebos may be an effective, safe alternative for menopausal hot flushes.
| S-EPMC7674475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess advanced communication skills among second-year medical students exposed either to a computer simulation (MPathic-VR) featuring virtual humans, or to a multimedia computer-based learning module, and to understand each group's experiences and learning preferences.MethodsA single-blinded, mixed methods, randomized, multisite trial compared MPathic-VR (N=210) to computer-based learning (N=211). Primary outcomes: communication scores during repeat interactions with MPathic-VR's intercultural and interprofessional communication scenarios and scores on a subsequent advanced communication skills objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare outcomes.Secondary outcomesstudent attitude surveys and qualitative assessments of their experiences with MPathic-VR or computer-based learning.ResultsMPathic-VR-trained students improved their intercultural and interprofessional communication performance between their first and second interactions with each scenario. They also achieved significantly higher composite scores on the OSCE than computer-based learning-trained students. Attitudes and experiences were more positive among students trained with MPathic-VR, who valued its providing immediate feedback, teaching nonverbal communication skills, and preparing them for emotion-charged patient encounters.ConclusionsMPathic-VR was effective in training advanced communication skills and in enabling knowledge transfer into a more realistic clinical situation.Practice implicationsMPathic-VR's virtual human simulation offers an effective and engaging means of advanced communication training.
| S-EPMC5385273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of Digital Healthcare Products is leading to significant improvements in clinical practice. Herein, we discuss the development of PROACT 2.0 (Patient Reported Opinions About Clinical Tolerability v2.0), a novel open-source mobile and web application developed at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori in Milan. It was developed in collaboration with The Christie, Manchester, in the context of work package 2 of the UpSMART Accelerator project, involving a consortium of referral cancer centers from the UK, Spain and Italy. PROACT 2.0 enhances communication between patients and healthcare providers in cancer clinical trials, allowing patients to report adverse events and side effects, and healthcare teams to collect valuable patient-reported outcome measures for treatment management. PROACT 2.0 supports text, audio, and video messaging, offering a secure, non-urgent communication channel that integrates with, or replaces, traditional methods. Its user-friendly and multilingual interface provides a new route for patient engagement and streamlines the handling of logistical information. Positive feedback from initial testing warrants future enhancements for broader applicability in cancer research and treatment.
| S-EPMC11487894 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPlacebos can reduce physical symptoms even when provided with full honesty and disclosure. Yet, the precise mechanisms underlying the effects of "open-label placebos" (OLPs) have remained subject of debate. Furthermore, it is unclear whether OLPs are similarly effective when provided remotely, as is sometimes required e.g. in the current COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsIn a randomized-controlled trial, we examined the effects of OLP plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone on symptom reduction in people with allergic rhinitis (N = 54) over the course of two weeks. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, OLP was provided remotely (i.e. sent via postal service). To investigate the potential influence of the clinical encounter on the effects of OLP, we manipulated the perception of the virtual clinical encounter, both with respect to verbal and nonverbal factors (augmented vs. limited encounter).ResultsThe results of the manipulation check confirmed that the augmented clinical encounter was evaluated more positively than the limited encounter, in terms of perceived warmth of the provider. Participants from all treatment groups showed significant symptom reduction from baseline to two weeks later, but OLP had no incremental effect over TAU. Participants benefitted more from OLP when they did not take any other medication against allergic symptoms than when taking medication on demand. When controlling for baseline symptoms, a significant treatment by encounter interaction was found, pointing to greater symptom improvement in the OLP group when the encounter was augmented, whereas the control group improved more when the encounter was limited.DiscussionThe study demonstrates that providing OLP and enhancing the encounter remotely is possible, but their effectiveness might be lower in comparison to previous studies relying on physical patient-provider interaction. The study raises questions for future research about the potential and challenges of remote placebo studies and virtual clinical encounters. The study has been registered as a clinical trial at ISRCTN (record number: 39018).
| S-EPMC7951912 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGrowing numbers of people use medication for chronic conditions; nonadherence is common, leading to poor disease control. A web-based tool to identify an increased risk for nonadherence with related potential individual barriers might facilitate tailored interventions and improve adherence.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of a newly developed tool aimed at improving medication adherence.MethodsWe performed a cluster randomized controlled trial in patients initiating cardiovascular or oral blood glucose-lowering medication. Participants were recruited from community pharmacies. They completed an online questionnaire comprising assessments of their risk for medication nonadherence and subsequently of barriers to adherence. In pharmacies belonging to the intervention group, individual barriers displayed in a graphical profile on a tablet were discussed by pharmacists and patients with high nonadherence risk in face-to-face meetings and shared with their general practitioners and practice nurses. Tailored interventions were initiated by pharmacists. Barriers of control patients were not presented nor discussed and these patients received usual care. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of the intervention on medication adherence at 8 months' follow-up between patients with an increased nonadherence risk from the intervention and control groups, calculated from dispensing data.ResultsData from 492 participants in 15 community pharmacies were available for analyses (intervention 253, 7 pharmacies; control 239, 8 pharmacies). The intervention had no effect on medication adherence (B=-0.01; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.57; P=.96), nor in the post hoc per-protocol analysis (B=0.19; 95% CI -0.50 to 0.89; P=.58).ConclusionsThis study showed no effectiveness of a risk stratification and tailored intervention addressing personal barriers for medication adherence. Various potential explanations for lack of effectiveness were identified. These explanations relate, for instance, to high medication adherence in the control group, study power, and fidelity. Process evaluation should elicit possible improvements and inform the redesign of intervention and implementation.Trial registrationThe Netherlands National Trial Register NTR5186; https://tinyurl.com/5d8w99hk.
| S-EPMC9030914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with suspected extrapulmonary tuberculosis are often treated empirically. We hypothesized that extended focused assessment with sonography for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis (eFASH), in combination with other tests, would increase the proportion of correctly managed patients with suspected extrapulmonary tuberculosis.MethodsThis trial in adults with suspected extrapulmonary tuberculosis was performed in a rural and an urban hospital in Tanzania. Participants were randomized 1:1 to intervention or routine care, stratified by site and HIV status. All participants underwent clinical evaluation, chest radiography, and testing with sputum Xpert MTB/RIF and urine Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assays. The intervention was a management algorithm based on results of eFASH plus microbiology, adenosine deaminase (ADA), and chest radiography. The primary outcome was the proportion of correctly managed patients. The presence of positive microbiological or ADA results defined definite tuberculosis. An independent end-point review committee determined diagnoses of probable or no tuberculosis. We evaluated outcomes using logistic regression models, adjusted for randomization stratification factors.ResultsFrom September 2018 to October 2020, a total of 1036 patients were screened and 701 were randomized (350 to the intervention and 351 to the control group). Of participants in the intervention group, 251 (72%) had a positive eFASH outcome. In 258 (74%) of the intervention and 227 (65%) of the control participants antituberculosis was initiated treatment at baseline. More intervention participants had definite tuberculosis (n = 124 [35%]), compared with controls (n = 85 [24%]). There was no difference between groups for the primary outcome (intervention group, 266 of 286 [93%]; control group, 245 of 266 [92%]; odds ratio, 1.14 [95% confidence interval: .60-2.16]; P = .68). There were no procedure-associated adverse events.ConclusionseFASH did not change the proportion of correctly managed patients but increased the proportion of those with definite tuberculosis.Clinical trials registrationPan African Registry: PACTR201712002829221.
| S-EPMC10029990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this 21-day assessor blinded, randomized-controlled trial was to compare an open-label placebo (OLP) to treatment as usual (TAU) for cancer survivors with fatigue. This was followed by an exploratory 21-day study in which TAU participants received OLPs while OLP participants in the main study were followed after discontinuing placebos. Cancer survivors (N = 74) who completed cancer treatment 6 months to 10 years prior to enrollment reporting at least moderate fatigue (i.e., ≥4 on a 0-10 scale) were randomized to OLP or TAU. Those randomized to OLP took 2 placebo pills twice a day for 21 days. Compared to those randomized to TAU, OLP participants reported a 29% improvement in fatigue severity (average difference in the mean change scores (MD) 12.47, 95% CI 3.32, 21.61; P = 0.008), medium effect (d = 0.63), and a 39% improvement in fatigue-disrupted quality of life (MD = 11.76, 95% CI 4.65, 18.86; P = 0.002), a large effect (d = 0.76). TAU participants who elected to try OLP for 21-days after the main study reported reductions in fatigue of a similar magnitude for fatigue severity and fatigue-disrupted quality of life (23% and 35%, respectively). OLP may reduce fatigue symptom severity and fatigue-related quality of life disruption in cancer survivors.
| S-EPMC5807541 | biostudies-literature