Dataset Information

A Follow-Up Clinical Trial Evaluating the Consumer-Decides Service Delivery Model.

ABSTRACT: Objectives There were 2 main objectives. The primary objective was to replicate a prior clinical trial of a consumer-decides (CD) approach to selecting hearing aids in older adults as a potential model for over-the-counter (OTC) intervention using less front-end screening of participants and a wider range of frequency-gain characteristics in the devices. The 2nd objective, only feasible if participant choices allowed, was to evaluate the efficacy of the CD approach relative to a CD-based placebo device. Design The design of this study is a single-site, prospective, double-blind clinical trial. Outcome measures were obtained after a typical 4- to 5-week trial period. An optional follow-up of a 4-week audiology-based (AB) best practices trial was also included for replication and comparison purposes. Setting Older adults from the general community were recruited via newspaper and community flyers to participate at a university research clinic. Participants Participants were adults, aged 54-78 years, with mild-moderate hearing loss. Forty-one participants enrolled as a volunteer sample; 40 completed the intervention. Intervention(s) All participants received the same high-end digital mini-behind-the-ear hearing aids fitted bilaterally. CD participants self-selected their own preprogrammed hearing aids via an OTC-type model. One of the 3 devices from which participants could choose was programmed to be a placebo device with no functional gain. Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures The primary outcome measure is the 66-item self-report Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit ( Cox & Alexander, 1990 ). The secondary outcome measure is the Connected Speech Test ( Cox, Alexander, & Gilmore, 1987 ) benefit. Additional measures of hearing aid benefit and usage were also obtained. Results Per-protocol analyses based on the data from the 40 (of 41) participants who completed the study were performed. Hearing aid outcomes from this follow-up CD (CD2) cohort were positive and generally the same as for the original CD cohort. CD service delivery model was efficacious relative to CD-based placebo control, with medium effect sizes observed. Approximately half of the CD2 group was likely to purchase hearing aids after the trial, similar to findings for the original CD cohort. Outcomes improved significantly for the 32 CD2 participants who elected to complete the optional 4-week AB trial. For this largely unscreened sample, more individuals with healthy hearing sought amplification, and many of these individuals (35%) chose placebo devices for both ears. Conclusions Prior positive outcomes for CD service delivery have been replicated in a less restrictive approach to participant recruitment. The CD approach was again found to be efficacious. Significantly better outcomes were observed after subsequent AB service delivery follow-up, also replicating prior findings. Efficacious OTC models, including those using similar CD approaches to hearing aid self-selection, may increase accessibility and affordability of hearing aids for millions of older adults. Front-end guidance to consumers regarding the best path to intervention, ranging from self-screening of hearing online to a full audiologic assessment, appears to be critical to optimize the success of OTC approaches. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01788432; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01788423 Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.7728479.

SUBMITTER: Humes LE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6802858 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Follow-Up Clinical Trial Evaluating the Consumer-Decides Service Delivery Model.

Humes Larry E LE Kinney Dana L DL Main Anna K AK Rogers Sara E SE

American journal of audiology 20190301 1

Objectives There were 2 main objectives. The primary objective was to replicate a prior clinical trial of a consumer-decides (CD) approach to selecting hearing aids in older adults as a potential model for over-the-counter (OTC) intervention using less front-end screening of participants and a wider range of frequency-gain characteristics in the devices. The 2nd objective, only feasible if participant choices allowed, was to evaluate the efficacy of the CD approach relative to a CD-based placebo ...[more]

PMID: 30938563

Similar Datasets

Project description:Voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) service delivery is complex and resource-intensive. In Kenya's context there is still paucity of information on resource use vis-à-vis outputs as programs scale up. Knowledge of technical efficiency, productivity and potential sources of constraints is desirable to improve decision-making.To evaluate technical efficiency and productivity of VMMC service delivery in Nyanza in 2011/2012 using data envelopment analysis.Comparative process evaluation of facilities providing VMMC in Nyanza in 2011/2012 using output orientated data envelopment analysis.Twenty one facilities were evaluated. Only 1 of 7 variables considered (total elapsed operation time) significantly improved from 32.8 minutes (SD 8.8) in 2011 to 30 minutes (SD 6.6) in 2012 (95%CI = 0.0350-5.2488; p = 0.047). Mean scale technical efficiency significantly improved from 91% (SD 19.8) in 2011 to 99% (SD 4.0) in 2012 particularly among outreach compared to fixed service delivery facilities (CI -31.47959-4.698508; p = 0.005). Increase in mean VRS technical efficiency from 84% (SD 25.3) in 2011 and 89% (SD 25.1) in 2012 was not statistically significant. Benchmark facilities were #119 and #125 in 2011 and #103 in 2012. Malmquist Productivity Index (MPI) at fixed facilities declined by 2.5% but gained by 4.9% at outreach ones by 2012. Total factor productivity improved by 83% (p = 0.032) in 2012, largely due to progress in technological efficiency by 79% (p = 0.008).Significant improvement in scale technical efficiency among outreach facilities in 2012 was attributable to accelerated activities. However, ongoing pure technical inefficiency requires concerted attention. Technological progress was the key driver of service productivity growth in Nyanza. Incorporating service-quality dimensions and using stepwise-multiple criteria in performance evaluation enhances comprehensiveness and validity. These findings highlight site-level resource use and sources of variations in VMMC service productivity, which are important for program planning.

Project description:BackgroundPalliative care has been proposed for progressive non-cancer conditions but there have been few evaluations of service developments. We analysed recruitment, compliance and follow-up data of a fast track (or wait list control) randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service - a design not previously used to assess palliative care.Methods/designAn innovative palliative care service (comprising a consultant in palliative medicine, a clinical nurse specialist, an administrator and a psychosocial worker) was delivered to people severely affected by multiple sclerosis (MS), and their carers, in southeast London. Our design followed the MRC Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Interventions. In phase II we conducted randomised controlled trial, of immediate referral to the service (fast-track) versus a 12-week wait (standard best practice). Main outcome measures were: compliance (the extent the trial protocol was adhered to), recruitment (target 50 patients), attrition and missing data rates; trial outcomes were Palliative Care Outcome Scale and MS Impact Scale.Results69 patients were referred, 52 entered the trial (26 randomised to each arm), 5 refused consent and 12 were excluded from the trial for other reasons, usually illness or urgent needs, achieving our target numbers. 25/26 fast track and 21/26 standard best practice patients completed the trial, resulting in 217/225 (96%) of possible interviews completed, 87% of which took place in the patient's home. Main reasons for failure to interview and/or attrition were death or illness. There were three deaths in the standard best practice group and one in the fast-track group during the trial. At baseline there were no differences between groups. Missing data for individual questionnaire items were small (median 0, mean 1-5 items out of 56+ items per interview), not associated with any patient or carer characteristics or with individual questionnaires, but were associated with interviewer.ConclusionThis is the first time a fast track (or wait list) randomised trial has been reported in palliative care. We found it achieved good recruitment and is a feasible method to evaluate palliative care services when patients are expected to live longer than 3-6 months. Home interviews are needed for a trial of this kind; interviewers need careful recruitment, training and supervision; and there should be careful separation from the clinical service of the control patients to prevent accidental contamination.Trial registrationClinical Trials.Gov NCT00364963.

Project description:BackgroundSCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months.MethodsThe study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I-III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p.Findings150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients.InterpretationSC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors.FundingVictorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.

Project description:ImportancePosthospitalization follow-up visits are prescribed frequently for children with bronchiolitis. The rationale for this practice is unclear, but prior work has indicated that families value these visits for the reassurance provided. The overall risks and benefits of scheduled visits have not been evaluated.ObjectiveTo assess whether an as-needed posthospitalization follow-up visit is noninferior to a scheduled posthospitalization follow-up visit with respect to reducing anxiety among parents of children hospitalized for bronchiolitis.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial, performed between January 1, 2018, and April 31, 2019, assessed children younger than 24 months of age hospitalized for bronchiolitis at 2 children's hospitals (Primary Children's Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah, and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, Palo Alto, California) and 2 community hospitals (Intermountain Riverton Hospital, Riverton, Utah, and Packard El Camino Hospital, Mountain View, California). Data analysis was performed in an intention-to-treat manner.InterventionsRandomization (1:1) to a scheduled (n = 151) vs an as-needed (n = 153) posthospitalization follow-up visit.Main outcome and measuresThe primary outcome was parental anxiety 7 days after hospital discharge, measured using the anxiety portion of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, which ranged from 0 to 28 points, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety. Fourteen prespecified secondary outcomes were assessed.ResultsAmong 304 children randomized (median age, 8 months; interquartile range, 3-14 months; 179 [59%] male), the primary outcome was available for 269 patients (88%). A total of 106 children (81%) in the scheduled follow-up group attended a scheduled posthospitalization visit compared with 26 children (19%) in the as-needed group (absolute difference, 62%; 95% CI, 53%-71%). The mean (SD) 7-day parental anxiety score was 3.9 (3.5) among the as-needed posthospitalization follow-up group and 4.2 (3.5) among the scheduled group (absolute difference, -0.3 points; 95% CI, -1.0 to 0.4 points), with the upper bound of the 95% CI within the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.1 points. Aside from a decreased mean number of clinic visits (absolute difference, -0.6 visits per patient; 95% CI, -0.4 to -0.8 visits per patient) among the as-needed group, there were no significant between-group differences in secondary outcomes, including readmissions (any hospital readmission before symptom resolution: absolute difference, -1.6%; 95% CI, -5.7% to 2.5%) and symptom duration (time from discharge to cough resolution: absolute difference, -0.6 days; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.2 days; time from discharge to child reported "back to normal": absolute difference, -0.8 days; 95% CI, -2.7 to 1.0 days; and time from discharge to symptom resolution: absolute difference, -0.6 days; 95% CI, -2.5 to 1.3 days).Conclusions and relevanceAmong parents of children hospitalized for bronchiolitis, an as-needed posthospitalization follow-up visit is noninferior to a scheduled posthospitalization follow-up visit with respect to reducing parental anxiety. These findings support as-needed follow-up as an effective posthospitalization follow-up strategy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03354325.

Dataset Information

A Follow-Up Clinical Trial Evaluating the Consumer-Decides Service Delivery Model.

Publications

A Follow-Up Clinical Trial Evaluating the Consumer-Decides Service Delivery Model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets