A Randomized Controlled Trial of a CPR and Intubation Video Decision Support Tool for Hospitalized Patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: El-Jawahri A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4510229 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A Randomized Controlled Trial of a CPR and Intubation Video Decision Support Tool for Hospitalized Patients.
El-Jawahri Areej A Mitchell Susan L SL Paasche-Orlow Michael K MK Temel Jennifer S JS Jackson Vicki A VA Rutledge Renee R RR Parikh Mihir M Davis Aretha D AD Gillick Muriel R MR Barry Michael J MJ Lopez Lenny L Walker-Corkery Elizabeth S ES Chang Yuchiao Y Finn Kathleen K Coley Christopher C Volandes Angelo E AE
Journal of general internal medicine 20150218 8
<h4>Background</h4>Decisions about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and intubation are a core part of advance care planning, particularly for seriously ill hospitalized patients. However, these discussions are often avoided.<h4>Objectives</h4>We aimed to examine the impact of a video decision tool for CPR and intubation on patients' choices, knowledge, medical orders, and discussions with providers.<h4>Design</h4>This was a prospective randomized trial conducted between 9 March 2011 and 1 Jun ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Conversations about goals of care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)/intubation for patients with advanced heart failure can be difficult. This study examined the impact of a video decision support tool and patient checklist on advance care planning for patients with heart failure.This was a multisite, randomized, controlled trial of a video-assisted intervention and advance care planning checklist versus a verbal description in 246 patients ?64 years of age with heart failure and an estimated likelihood of death of >50% within 2 years. Intervention participants received a verbal description for goals of care (life-prolonging care, limited care, and comfort care) and CPR/intubation plus a 6-minute video depicting the 3 levels of care, CPR/intubation, and an advance care planning checklist. Control subjects received only the verbal description. The primary analysis compared the proportion of patients preferring comfort care between study arms immediately after the intervention. Secondary outcomes were CPR/intubation preferences and knowledge (6-item test; range, 0-6) after intervention.In the intervention group, 27 (22%) chose life-prolonging care, 31 (25%) chose limited care, 63 (51%) selected comfort care, and 2 (2%) were uncertain. In the control group, 50 (41%) chose life-prolonging care, 27 (22%) selected limited care, 37 (30%) chose comfort care, and 8 (7%) were uncertain (P<0.001). Intervention participants (compared with control subjects) were more likely to forgo CPR (68% versus 35%; P<0.001) and intubation (77% versus 48%; P<0.001) and had higher mean knowledge scores (4.1 versus 3.0; P<0.001).Patients with heart failure who viewed a video were more informed, more likely to select a focus on comfort, and less likely to desire CPR/intubation compared with patients receiving verbal information only.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01589120.
| S-EPMC4933326 | biostudies-other
Project description:Decision making regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is challenging. This study examined the effect of a video decision support tool on CPR preferences among patients with advanced cancer.We performed a randomized controlled trial of 150 patients with advanced cancer from four oncology centers. Participants in the control arm (n = 80) listened to a verbal narrative describing CPR and the likelihood of successful resuscitation. Participants in the intervention arm (n = 70) listened to the identical narrative and viewed a 3-minute video depicting a patient on a ventilator and CPR being performed on a simulated patient. The primary outcome was participants' preference for or against CPR measured immediately after exposure to either modality. Secondary outcomes were participants' knowledge of CPR (score range of 0 to 4, with higher score indicating more knowledge) and comfort with video.The mean age of participants was 62 years (standard deviation, 11 years); 49% were women, 44% were African American or Latino, and 47% had lung or colon cancer. After the verbal narrative, in the control arm, 38 participants (48%) wanted CPR, 41 (51%) wanted no CPR, and one (1%) was uncertain. In contrast, in the intervention arm, 14 participants (20%) wanted CPR, 55 (79%) wanted no CPR, and 1 (1%) was uncertain (unadjusted odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.7 to 7.2; P < .001). Mean knowledge scores were higher in the intervention arm than in the control arm (3.3 ± 1.0 v 2.6 ± 1.3, respectively; P < .001), and 65 participants (93%) in the intervention arm were comfortable watching the video.Participants with advanced cancer who viewed a video of CPR were less likely to opt for CPR than those who listened to a verbal narrative.
| S-EPMC4090424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of a video decision support tool on the preferences for future medical care in older people if they develop advanced dementia, and the stability of those preferences after six weeks.DesignRandomised controlled trial conducted between 1 September 2007 and 30 May 2008. Setting Four primary care clinics (two geriatric and two adult medicine) affiliated with three academic medical centres in Boston.ParticipantsConvenience sample of 200 older people (>or=65 years) living in the community with previously scheduled appointments at one of the clinics. Mean age was 75 and 58% were women.InterventionVerbal narrative alone (n=106) or with a video decision support tool (n=94).Main outcome measuresPreferred goal of care: life prolonging care (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation), limited care (admission to hospital, antibiotics, but not cardiopulmonary resuscitation), or comfort care (treatment only to relieve symptoms). Preferences after six weeks. The principal category for analysis was the difference in proportions of participants in each group who preferred comfort care.ResultsAmong participants receiving the verbal narrative alone, 68 (64%) chose comfort care, 20 (19%) chose limited care, 15 (14%) chose life prolonging care, and three (3%) were uncertain. In the video group, 81 (86%) chose comfort care, eight (9%) chose limited care, four (4%) chose life prolonging care, and one (1%) was uncertain (chi(2)=13.0, df=3, P=0.003). Among all participants the factors associated with a greater likelihood of opting for comfort care were being a college graduate or higher, good or better health status, greater health literacy, white race, and randomisation to the video arm. In multivariable analysis, participants in the video group were more likely to prefer comfort care than those in the verbal group (adjusted odds ratio 3.9, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 8.6). Participants were re-interviewed after six weeks. Among the 94/106 (89%) participants re-interviewed in the verbal group, 27 (29%) changed their preferences (kappa=0.35). Among the 84/94 (89%) participants re-interviewed in the video group, five (6%) changed their preferences (kappa=0.79) (P<0.001 for difference).ConclusionOlder people who view a video depiction of a patient with advanced dementia after hearing a verbal description of the condition are more likely to opt for comfort as their goal of care compared with those who solely listen to a verbal description. They also have more stable preferences over time.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00704886.
| S-EPMC2688013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Physicians often find significant challenges in assessing automobile driving in persons with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia and deciding when to report to transportation administrators. Care must be taken to balance the safety of patients and other road users with potential negative effects of issuing such reports. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess whether a computer-based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool (DD-DT) increased appropriate reporting of patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators. METHODS:The study used a parallel-group cluster nonblinded randomized controlled trial design to test a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention. The intervention included a computer-based decision support system activated by the physician-user, which provides a recommendation about whether to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, based on an algorithm derived from earlier work. The intervention also included a mailed educational package and Web-based specialized reporting forms. Specialists and family physicians with expertise in dementia or care of the elderly were stratified by sex and randomized to either use the DD-DT or a control version of the tool that required identical data input as the intervention group, but instead generated a generic reminder about the reporting legislation in Ontario, Canada. The trial ran from September 9, 2014 to January 29, 2016, and the primary outcome was the number of reports made to the transportation administrators concordant with the algorithm. RESULTS:A total of 69 participating physicians were randomized, and 36 of these used the DD-DT; 20 of the 35 randomized to the intervention group used DD-DT with 114 patients, and 16 of the 34 randomized to the control group used it with 103 patients. The proportion of all assessed patients reported to the transportation administrators concordant with recommendation did not differ between the intervention and the control groups (50% vs 49%; Z=-0.19, P=.85). Two variables predicted algorithm-based reporting-caregiver concern (odds ratio [OR]=5.8, 95% CI 2.5-13.6, P<.001) and abnormal clock drawing (OR 6.1, 95% CI 3.1-11.8, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS:On the basis of this quantitative analysis, in-office abnormal clock drawing and expressions of concern about driving from caregivers substantially influenced physicians to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, but the DD-DT tool itself did not increase such reports among these expert physicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02036099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036099 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6zGMF1ky8).
| S-EPMC5993977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung cancer screening is a US Preventive Services Task Force Grade B recommendation that has been shown to decrease lung cancer-related mortality by approximately 20%. However, making the decision to screen, or not, for lung cancer is a complex decision because there are potential risks (eg, false positive results, overdiagnosis). Shared decision making was incorporated into the lung cancer screening guideline and, for the first time, is a requirement for reimbursement of a cancer screening test from Medicare. Awareness of lung cancer screening remains low in both the general and screening-eligible populations. When a screening-eligible person visits their clinician never having heard about lung cancer screening, engaging in shared decision making to arrive at an informed decision can be a challenge. Methods to effectively prepare patients for these clinical encounters and support both patients and clinicians to engage in these important discussions are needed.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to estimate the effects of a computer-tailored decision support tool that meets the certification criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards that will prepare individuals and support shared decision making in lung cancer screening decisions.MethodsA pilot randomized controlled trial with a community-based sample of 60 screening-eligible participants who have never been screened for lung cancer was conducted. Approximately half of the participants (n=31) were randomized to view LungTalk-a web-based tailored computer program-while the other half (n=29) viewed generic information about lung cancer screening from the American Cancer Society. The outcomes that were compared included lung cancer and screening knowledge, lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy), and perception of being prepared to engage in a discussion about lung cancer screening with their clinician.ResultsKnowledge scores increased significantly for both groups with greater improvement noted in the group receiving LungTalk (2.33 vs 1.14 mean change). Perceived self-efficacy and perceived benefits improved in the theoretically expected directions.ConclusionsLungTalk goes beyond other decision tools by addressing lung health broadly, in the context of performing a low-dose computed tomography of the chest that has the potential to uncover other conditions of concern beyond lung cancer, to more comprehensively educate the individual, and extends the work of nontailored decision aids in the field by introducing tailoring algorithms and message framing based upon smoking status in order to determine what components of the intervention drive behavior change when an individual is informed and makes the decision whether to be screened or not to be screened for lung cancer.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/resprot.8694.
| S-EPMC7671845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundViews on advance care planning (ACP) has shifted from a focus solely on treatment decisions at the end-of-life and medically orientated advanced directives to encouraging conversations on personal values and life goals, patient-caregiver communication and decision making, and family preparation. This study will evaluate the potential utility of a video decision support tool (VDST) that models values-based ACP discussions between cancer patients and their nominated caregivers to enable patients and families to achieve shared-decisions when completing ACP's.MethodsThis open-label, parallel-arm, phase II randomised control trial will recruit cancer patient-caregiver dyads across a large health network. Previously used written vignettes will be converted to video vignettes using the recommended methodology. Participants will be ≥18 years and be able to complete questionnaires. Dyads will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a usual care (UC) or VDST group. The VDST group will watch a video of several patient-caregiver dyads communicating personal values across different cancer trajectory stages and will receive verbal and written ACP information. The UC group will receive verbal and written ACP information. Patient and caregiver data will be collected individually via an anonymous questionnaire developed for the study, pre and post the UC and VDST intervention. Our primary outcome will be ACP completion rates. Secondarily, we will compare patient-caregiver (i) attitudes towards ACP, (ii) congruence in communication, and (iii) preparation for decision-making.ConclusionWe need to continue to explore innovative ways to engage cancer patients in ACP. This study will be the first VDST study to attempt to integrate values-based conversations into an ACP intervention. This pilot study's findings will assist with further refinement of the VDST and planning for a future multisite study.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry No: ACTRN12620001035910 . Registered 12 October 2020. Retrospectively registered.
| S-EPMC8229383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceBetter advance care planning (ACP) can help promote goal-directed care in patients with advanced dementia.ObjectivesTo test whether an ACP video (vs usual care) has an effect on documented advance directives, level of care preferences, goals-of-care discussions, and burdensome treatments among nursing home residents with advanced dementia.Design, setting, and participantsThe Educational Video to Improve Nursing home Care in End-stage dementia (EVINCE) trial was a cluster randomized clinical trial conducted between February 2013 and July 2017, at 64 Boston-area nursing homes (32 facilities per arm). A total of 402 residents with advanced dementia and their proxies (intervention arm, n = 212; control arm, n = 190) were assessed quarterly for 12 months.InterventionsA 12-minute ACP video for proxies with written communication of their preferred level of care (comfort, basic, or intensive) to the primary care team.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of residents with do-not-hospitalize (DNH) directives by 6 months. Secondary outcomes included preference for comfort care, documented directives to withhold tube-feeding and intravenous hydration, documented goals-of-care discussions, and burdensome treatments (hospital transfers, tube-feeding, or parenteral therapy) per 1000 resident-days. Exploratory analyses examined associations between trial arm and documented advance directives when comfort care was preferred.ResultsThe mean age of the 402 study residents was 86.7 years [range, 67-102 years]; 350 were white (87.1%) and 323 were female (80.3%), with DNH directives that by 6 months did not differ between arms (63% in both arms; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.69-1.69). Preferences for comfort care, directives to withhold intravenous hydration, and burdensome treatments did not differ between arms. Residents in intervention vs control facilities were more likely to have directives for no tube-feeding at 6 months (70.10% vs 61.90%; AOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.13-2.82) and all other time periods, and documented goals-of-care discussions at 3 months (16.10% vs 7.90%; AOR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.20-5.54). When comfort care was preferred, residents in the intervention arm were more likely to have both DNH and no tube-feeding directives (72.20% vs 52.80%; AOR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.68-5.85).Conclusions and relevanceAn ACP video did not have an effect on preferences, DNH status, or burdensome treatments among residents with advanced dementia, but did increase directives to withhold tube-feeding. When proxies preferred comfort care, advance directives of residents in the intervention arm were more likely to align with that preference.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01774799.
| S-EPMC6033645 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdolescents and young adults (AYAs) with advanced cancer often receive intensive end-of-life care, yet it is unclear if this is goal-concordant. Advance care planning (ACP) video tools may promote identification and communication of AYA preferences.Patients and methodsWe conducted a dual-site, 1:1 pilot randomized controlled trial of a novel video-based ACP tool in 50 dyads of AYA patients aged 18 to 39 years with advanced cancer and their caregivers. ACP readiness and knowledge, preferences for future care, and decisional conflict were obtained pre, post, and 3 months after the intervention and compared between groups.ResultsOf the 50 AYA/caregiver dyads enrolled, 25 (50%) were randomized to the intervention. Participants primarily identified as female, white, and non-Hispanic. Most AYAs (76%) and caregivers (86%) identified their overall goal as life-prolonging preintervention; less identified this goal postintervention (42% AYAs; 52% caregivers). There was no significant difference in change in proportion of AYAs or caregivers choosing life-prolonging care, CPR, or ventilation between arms postintervention or at 3 months. The change in participant scores for ACP knowledge (AYAs and caregivers) and ACP readiness (AYAs) from preintervention to postintervention was greater in the video arm compared with the control arm; the difference in caregivers' scores for decisional conflict from preintervention to postintervention in the video arm was statistically significant (15 vs 7; P=.005). Feedback from the video participants was overwhelmingly positive; of the 45 intervention participants who provided video feedback, 43 (96%) found the video helpful, 40 (89%) were comfortable viewing the video, and 42 (93%) indicated they would recommend the video to other patients facing similar decisions.ConclusionsMost AYAs with advanced cancer and their caregivers preferred life-prolonging care in advanced illness, with fewer preferring this type of care postintervention. A brief video-based ACP tool was well-liked by participants and improved caregiver decisional certainty. Videos may be a useful tool to inform AYAs and caregivers about end-of-life care options and promote ACP discussions.
| S-EPMC11261458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA rigid video-stylet intubation device provides safe and accurate access to the trachea by enabling visualization of the airway structures during tracheal intubation. The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effects of glycopyrrolate premedication on tracheal intubation with a rigid video-stylet.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 78 patients were randomly assigned to the control group (n = 39; no glycopyrrolate administration) or the glycopyrrolate group (n = 39; 0.005 mg/kg glycopyrrolate, intramuscular injection). A rigid video-stylet was used for tracheal intubation. The degree of oral secretion observed through the video-stylet monitor was assessed using the OptiScope laryngeal view and graded on a 4-point scale (1, excellent; 2, good; 3, poor; and 4, unacceptable). The time to intubation and hemodynamic variables at baseline and 1, 3, and 5 minutes after intubation were recorded.ResultsThe OptiScope laryngeal view grades of the glycopyrrolate group (grade 1 = 16 [41.0%], 2 = 17 [43.6%], 3 = 6 [15.4%], and 4 = 0 [0%]) were significantly higher than those of the control group (grade 1 = 9 [23.1%], 2 = 11 [28.2%], 3 = 18 [46.2%], and 4 = 1 [2.6%]; P = .02). The intubation time was shorter in the glycopyrrolate group (18.5 seconds [15.0-22.0]) than the control group (22.0 seconds [17.9-26.4], P = .02). There was no significant difference in the hemodynamic variables between groups.ConclusionGlycopyrrolate facilitated tracheal intubation with a rigid video-stylet by decreasing oral secretions and providing better visualization and faster intubation with hemodynamic stability.Trial registrywww.clinicaltrials.gov; Identifier: NCT03050242.
| S-EPMC6133530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundData on the routine use of video-assisted laryngoscopy in peri-operative intubations are rather inconsistent and ambiguous, in part due to small populations and non-uniform outcome measures in past trials. Failed or prolonged intubation procedures are a reason for relevant morbidity and mortality. This study aims to determine whether video-assisted laryngoscopy (with both Macintosh-shaped and hyperangulated blades) is at least equal to the standard method of direct laryngoscopy with respect to the first-pass success rate. Furthermore, validated tools from the field of human factors will be applied to examine within-team communication and task load during this critical medical procedure.MethodsIn this randomized, controlled, three-armed parallel group design, multi-centre trial, a total of more than 2500 adult patients scheduled for perioperative endotracheal intubation will be randomized. In equally large arms, video-assisted laryngoscopy with a Macintosh-shaped or a hyperangulated blade will be compared to the standard of care (direct laryngoscopy with Macintosh blade). In a pre-defined hierarchical analysis, we will test the primary outcome for non-inferiority first. If this goal should be met, the design and projected statistical power also allow for subsequent testing for superiority of one of the interventions. Various secondary outcomes will account for patient safety considerations as well as human factors interactions within the provider team and will allow for further exploratory data analysis and hypothesis generation.DiscussionThis randomized controlled trial will provide a solid base of data in a field where reliable evidence is of major clinical importance. With thousands of endotracheal intubations performed every day in operating rooms around the world, every bit of performance improvement translates into increased patient safety and comfort and may eventually prevent significant burden of disease. Therefore, we feel confident that a large trial has the potential to considerably benefit patients and anaesthetists alike.Trial registrationClincalTrials.gov NCT05228288.Protocol version1.1, November 15, 2021.
| S-EPMC10111720 | biostudies-literature