Dataset Information

Design of the patient navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study: A pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial.

ABSTRACT: Previous work indicates the potential for community health workers and peer coaches serving as patient navigators to improve processes of care and health outcomes during care transitions, but have not been sufficiently tested to determine if such programs improve measures of patient experience in minority serving institutions. The objectives of the Patient Navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study was to: 1) conduct a pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial comparing a multi-faceted, stakeholder-supported Navigator intervention (in-person CHW visits in the hospital and after hospital discharge, plus telephone-based peer coaching) versus usual care on the experience of hospital-to-home care transitions in patients hospitalized with heart failure, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, myocardial infarction, or sickle cell disease; 2) examine the effectiveness of the Navigator intervention in patient subgroups; and 3) understand the barriers and facilitators of successfully implementing the Navigator intervention across patient populations. The co-primary outcomes are the 30-day changes in: 1) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) emotional distress-anxiety, and 2) PROMIS informational support. Secondary outcomes at 30 and 60 days include other PROMIS health measures and hospital readmissions. Innovative features of the PArTNER study include early and continuous engagement of patients, their caregivers, clinicians, health system administrators, and other stakeholders to inform the design and implementation of the Navigator intervention. In this report, we describe the design of the PArTNER study.

SUBMITTER: Prieto-Centurion V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6700266 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Design of the patient navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study: A pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial.

Prieto-Centurion Valentin V Basu Sanjib S Bracken Nina N Calhoun Elizabeth E Dickens Carolyn C DiDomenico Robert J RJ Gallardo Richard R Gordeuk Victor V Gutierrez-Kapheim Melissa M Hsu Lewis L LL Illendula Sai S Joo Min M Kazmi Uzma U Mutso Amelia A Pickard A Simon AS Pittendrigh Barry B Sullivan Jamie L JL Williams Mark M Krishnan Jerry A JA

Contemporary clinical trials communications 20190719

Previous work indicates the potential for community health workers and peer coaches serving as patient navigators to improve processes of care and health outcomes during care transitions, but have not been sufficiently tested to determine if such programs improve measures of patient experience in minority serving institutions. The objectives of the Patient Navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study was to: 1) conduct a pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial comparing a multi-faceted, stake ...[more]

PMID: 31440690

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based interventions to reduce hospital readmissions may not generalize to resource-constrained safety-net hospitals. OBJECTIVE:To determine if an intervention by patient navigators (PNs), hospital-based Community Health Workers, reduces readmissions among high risk, low socioeconomic status patients. DESIGN:Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS:General medicine inpatients having at least one of the following readmission risk factors: (1) age??60 years, (2) any in-network inpatient admission within the past 6 months, (3) length of stay??3 days, (4) admission diagnosis of heart failure, or (5) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The analytic sample included 585 intervention patients and 925 controls. INTERVENTIONS:PNs provided coaching and assistance in navigating the transition from hospital to home through hospital visits and weekly telephone outreach, supporting patients for 30 days post-discharge with discharge preparation, medication management, scheduling of follow-up appointments, communication with primary care, and symptom management. MAIN MEASURES:The primary outcome was in-network 30-day hospital readmissions. Secondary outcomes included rates of outpatient follow-up. We evaluated outcomes for the entire cohort and stratified by patient age >60 years (425 intervention/584 controls) and ?60 years (160 intervention/341 controls). KEY RESULTS:Overall, 30-day readmission rates did not differ between intervention and control patients. However, the two age groups demonstrated marked differences. Intervention patients >60 years showed a statistically significant adjusted absolute 4.1% decrease [95% CI: -8.0%, -0.2%] in readmission with an increase in 30-day outpatient follow-up. Intervention patients ?60 years showed a statistically significant adjusted absolute 11.8% increase [95% CI: 4.4%, 19.0%] in readmission with no change in 30-day outpatient follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:A patient navigator intervention among high risk, safety-net patients decreased readmission among older patients while increasing readmissions among younger patients. Care transition strategies should be evaluated among diverse populations, and younger high risk patients may require novel strategies.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Transition to adult care is a challenging and complex process for youth with special healthcare needs. We aim to compare effectiveness of a patient navigator service in reducing emergency room (ER) use among adolescents with chronic health conditions transitioning to adult care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Pragmatic randomised controlled trial parallel group design comparing ER visit rates between patients with access to a personalised navigator intervention compared with usual care. Unit of randomisation is the patient. Treatment assignment will not be blinded. Embedded qualitative study to understand navigator's role and cost analysis attributable to the intervention will be performed. Patients aged 16-21 years, followed within a chronic disease clinic, expected to be transferred to adult care within 12 months and residing in Alberta during study period will be recruited from three tertiary care paediatric hospitals. Sample size will be 300 in each arm. Navigator intervention over 24 months is designed to assist participants in four domains: transition preparation, health system brokering, socioeconomic determinants of health and self-management. Primary outcome is ER visit rate during observation period. Secondary outcomes are ambulatory and inpatient care utilisation measures, as well as Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire score, and Short-Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12) score at 6 and 18 months post-randomisation. Poisson regression will compare rates of ER/urgent care visits between navigator and control participants, using intention to treat principle. Cost analysis of the intervention will be conducted. Thematic analysis will be used to identify perceptions of stakeholders regarding the role of navigators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB #162561) and the University of Alberta Health Research Ethics Board (Pro00077325). Our team is composed of diverse stakeholders who are committed to improving transition of care who will assist with dissemination of results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03342495.

Project description:BackgroundCluster randomized trials (CRTs) are trials in which intact groups such as hemodialysis centers or shifts are randomized to treatment or control arms. Pragmatic CRTs have been promoted as a promising trial design for nephrology research yet may also pose ethical challenges. While randomization occurs at the cluster level, the intervention and data collection may vary in a CRT, challenging the identification of research participants. Moreover, when a waiver of patient consent is granted by a research ethics committee, there is an open question as to whether and to what degree patients should be notified about ongoing research or be provided with a debrief regarding the nature and results of the trial upon completion. While empirical and conceptual research exploring ethical issues in pragmatic CRTs has begun to emerge, there has been limited discussion with patients, families, or caregivers of patients undergoing hemodialysis.ObjectiveTo explore with patients and families with experience of hemodialysis research the challenges raised by different approaches to designing pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. Specifically, their perceptions of (1) the use of a waiver of consent, (2) notification processes and information provided to participants, and (3) any other concerns about cluster randomized designs in hemodialysis.DesignFocus group and interview discussions of hypothetical clinical trial designs.SettingFocus groups and interviews were conducted in-person or via videoconference or telephone.ParticipantsPatient partners in hemodialysis research, defined as patients with personal experience of dialysis or a family member who had experience supporting a patient receiving hemodialysis, who have been actively involved in discussions to advise a research team on the design, conduct, or implementation of a hemodialysis trial.MethodsParticipants were invited to participate in focus groups or individual discussions that were audio recorded with consent. Recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim prior to analysis. Transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.ResultsTwo focus groups, three individual interviews, and one interview involving a patient and family member were conducted with 17 individuals between February 2019 and May 2020. Participants expressed support for approaches that emphasized patient choice. Disclosure of patient-relevant risks and information were key themes. Both consent and notification processes served to generate trust, but bypassing patient choice was perceived as undermining this trust. Participants did not dismiss the option of a waiver of consent. They were, however, more restrictive in their views about when a waiver of consent may be acceptable. Patient partners were skeptical of claims to impracticability based on costs or the time commitments for staff.LimitationsAll participants were from Canada and had been involved in the design or conduct of a trial, limiting the degree to which results may be extrapolated.ConclusionsGiven the preferences of participants to be afforded the opportunity to decide about trial participation, we argue that investigators should thoroughly investigate approaches that allow participants to make an informed choice regarding trial participation. In keeping with the preference for autonomous choice, there remains a need to further explore how consent approaches can be designed to facilitate clinical trial conduct while meeting their ethical requirements. Finally, further work is needed to define the limited circumstances in which waivers of consent are appropriate.

Project description:IntroductionMinority-serving hospitals (MSHs) need evidence-based strategies tailored to the populations they serve to improve patient-centered outcomes after hospitalization.MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (RCT) from October 2014 to January 2017 at a MSH comparing the effectiveness of a stakeholder-supported Navigator intervention vs. Usual care on post-hospital patient experience, outcomes, and healthcare utilization. Community health workers and peer coaches delivered the intervention which included (1) in-hospital visits to assess barriers to health/healthcare and to develop a personalized Discharge Patient Education Tool (DPET); (2) a home visit to review the DPET; and (3) telephone-based peer coaching. The co-primary outcomes were between-group comparisons of 30-day changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures of anxiety and informational support (minimum important difference is 2 to 5 units change); a p-value <0.025 was considered significant using intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included death, ED visits, or readmissions and measures of emotional, social, and physical health at 30 and 60 days.ResultsWe enrolled 1029 adults hospitalized with heart failure (28%), pneumonia (22%), MI (10%), COPD (11%), or sickle cell disease (29%). Over 80% were non-Hispanic Black. Overall, there were no significant between-group differences in the 30-day change in anxiety (adjusted difference: -1.6, 97.5% CI -3.3 to 0.1, p=0.03), informational support (adjusted difference: -0.01, 97.5% CI -2.0 to 1.9, p=0.99), or any secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggested the Navigator intervention improved anxiety among participants with COPD, a primary care provider, a hospitalization in the past 12 months, or higher baseline anxiety; among participants without health insurance, the intervention improved informational support (all p-values <0.05).ConclusionsIn this pragmatic RCT at a MSH, the Navigator intervention did not improve post-hospital anxiety, informational support, or other outcomes compared to Usual care. Benefits observed in participant subgroups should be confirmed in future studies.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02114515.

Project description:IntroductionPeople experiencing homelessness suffer from poor outcomes after hospitalisation due to systemic barriers to care, suboptimal transitions of care, and intersecting health and social burdens. Case management programmes have been shown to improve housing stability, but their effects on broad posthospital outcomes in this population have not been rigorously evaluated. The Navigator Programme is a Critical Time Intervention case management programme that was developed to help homeless patients with their postdischarge needs and to link them with community-based health and social services. This randomised controlled trial examines the impact of the Navigator Programme on posthospital outcomes among adults experiencing homelessness.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of the Navigator Programme at an urban academic teaching hospital and an urban community teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. Six hundred and forty adults experiencing homelessness who are admitted to the hospital will be randomised to receive support from a Homeless Outreach Counsellor for 90 days after hospital discharge or to usual care. The primary outcome is follow-up with a primary care provider (physician or nurse practitioner) within 14 days of hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes include postdischarge mortality or readmission, number of days in hospital, number of emergency department visits, self-reported care transition quality, and difficulties meeting subsistence needs. Quantitative outcomes are being collected over a 180-day period through linked patient-reported and administrative health data. A parallel mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted to explore intervention context, implementation and mechanisms of impact.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board. Participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Results of the main trial and process evaluation will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and shared with hospital leadership, community partners and policy makers.Trial registration numberNCT04961762.

Project description:Although epidemiological research demonstrates that there is an association between lifestyle factors and risk of breast cancer recurrence, progression of disease, and mortality, no comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trials have been conducted to determine if changing multiple risk factors leads to changes in biobehavioral processes and clinical outcomes in women with breast cancer. This article describes the design, feasibility, adherence to the intervention and data collection, and patient experience of a comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trial (CompLife).CompLife is a randomized, controlled trial of a multiple-behavior intervention focusing on diet, exercise, and mind-body practice along with behavioral counseling to support change. The initial exposure to the intervention takes place during the 4 to 6 weeks of radiotherapy (XRT) for women with stage III breast cancer and then across the subsequent 12 months. The intervention group will have 42 hours of in-person lifestyle counseling during XRT (7-10 hours a week) followed by up to 30 hours of counseling via video connection for the subsequent 12 months (weekly sessions for 6 months and then monthly for 6 months). The primary outcome is disease-free survival. Multiple secondary outcomes are being evaluated, including: (1) biological pathways; (2) overall survival; (3) patient-reported outcomes; (4) dietary patterns/fitness levels, anthropometrics, and body composition; and (5) economic outcomes. Qualitative data of the patient experience in the trial is collected from exit interviews, concluding remarks, direct email correspondences, and web postings from patients.Fifty-five patients have been recruited and randomized to the trial to date. Accrual of eligible patients is high (72%) and dropout rates extremely low (5%). Attendance to the in-person sessions is high (95% attending greater than 80% of sessions) as well as to the 30 hours of video counseling (88% attending more than 70% of sessions). Adherence to components of the behavior change intervention is high and compliance with the intensive amount of data collection is exceptional. Qualitative data collected from the participants reveals testimonials supporting the importance of the comprehensive nature of intervention, especially the mind-body/mindfulness component and social support, and meaningful lifestyle transformations.Conducting a comprehensive, multicomponent, lifestyle change clinical trial for women with breast was feasible and collection of biobehavioral outcomes successful. Adherence to behavior change was high and patient experience was overwhelmingly positive.

Project description:We elicited patient experiences from clinical trial simulations to aid in future trial development and to improve patient recruitment and retention.Two simulations of draft Phase II and Phase III anifrolumab studies for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)/lupus nephritis (LN) were performed involving African-American patients from Grady Hospital, an indigent care hospital in Atlanta, GA, USA, and white patients from Altoona Arthritis and Osteoporosis Center in Altoona, PA, USA. The clinical trial simulation included an informed consent procedure, a mock screening visit, a mock dosing visit, and a debriefing period for patients and staff. Patients and staff were interviewed to obtain sentiments and perceptions related to the simulated visits.The Atlanta study involved 6 African-American patients (5 female) aged 27-60 years with moderate to severe SLE/LN. The Altoona study involved 12 white females aged 32-75 years with mild to moderate SLE/LN. Patient experiences had an impact on four patient-centric care domains: 1) information, communication, and education; 2) responsiveness to needs; 3) access to care; and 4) coordination of care; and continuity and transition. Patients in both studies desired background material, knowledgeable staff, family and friend support, personal results, comfortable settings, shorter wait times, and greater scheduling flexibility. Compared with the Altoona study patients, Atlanta study patients reported greater preferences for information from the Internet, need for strong community and online support, difficulties in discussing SLE, emphasis on transportation and child care help during the visits, and concerns related to financial matters; and they placed greater importance on time commitment, understanding of potential personal benefit, trust, and confidentiality of patient data as factors for participation. Using these results, we present recommendations to improve study procedures to increase retention, recruitment, and compliance for clinical trials.Insights from these two studies can be applied to the development and implementation of future clinical trials to improve patient recruitment, retention, compliance, and advocacy.

Dataset Information

Design of the patient navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study: A pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial.

Publications

Design of the patient navigator to Reduce Readmissions (PArTNER) study: A pragmatic clinical effectiveness trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets