A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Optimal Patient-Centered Care

Overview

The nation's trauma care system, which includes trauma center hospitals & emergency departments, is where over 30 million Americans receive care after traumatic injuries each year. Injury victims are diverse patients who suffer from complications of the initial injury as well as from multiple complex medical & mental health conditions. Currently, high-quality patient-centered care is not the standard of care throughout US trauma care systems. Injured trauma survivors treated in trauma care systems frequently receive fragmented care that is not coordinated across hospital, emergency department, outpatient, & community settings. Post-injury care is frequently not individualized to integrate the patient's most pressing post-traumatic concerns & preferences into medical decision making. The investigators, as a group of front-line trauma center providers, patients, researchers & policy makers, have been working together for over a decade to integrate patient-centered care into US trauma care systems. The investigators began this work by asking groups of injured patients the key patient-centered question: "Of everything that has happened to you since your injury, what concerns you the most?" The investigators developed scientifically sound assessment tools that allowed us to follow patient concerns after injury hospitalization. In May of 2011, the investigators convened an American College of Surgeons' policy summit that addressed mental health & patient-centered care integration across US trauma care systems. As part of this policy summit, patient members of our team presented their experiences of traumatic injury & recovery. While giving injured patients a "voice" at the summit, these narratives did not move surgical policy makers to develop mandates or guidelines for patient-centered care. In contrast, presentations that included information from randomized comparative effectiveness trials & standardized outcome assessments convinced surgical policy makers to develop US trauma care system policy mandates & best practice guidelines for post-traumatic stress disorder & alcohol use problems. Our team now realizes that in order to optimally integrate patient-centered care into US trauma care systems, the investigators must use the best scientific methods that capture the highest-quality data. This PCORI proposal aims to demonstrate that a patient-centered care management treatment that addresses patient's post-injury concerns & integrates patient concerns & preferences into medical decision making, while also coordinating care, can improve outcomes of great importance to patients & their caregivers, front-line providers & policy makers. This proposal directly addresses two PCORI patient-centered research questions: "After a traumatic injury, what can I do to improve the outcomes that are most important to me?" & "How can front-line providers working in trauma care systems help me make the best decisions about my post-injury health & health care?"

Full Title of Study: “A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Optimal Patient-Centered Care for US Trauma Care Systems”

Study Type

  • Study Type: Interventional
  • Study Design
    • Allocation: Randomized
    • Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
    • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
    • Masking: Single (Outcomes Assessor)
  • Study Primary Completion Date: December 2016

Interventions

  • Behavioral: Stepped Care Management
    • Case management, information technology/mHealth innovations, stepped-up psychopharmacology and psychotherapy elements.

Arms, Groups and Cohorts

  • No Intervention: Enhanced Usual Care – Nurse Notification of Patient Concerns
    • Randomized and will be blindly assessed.
  • Experimental: Patient-centered care transition
    • Case management, information technology/mHealth innovations, stepped-up psychopharmacology and psychotherapy elements. Randomized and will be blindly assessed.

Clinical Trial Outcome Measures

Primary Measures

  • Change in Post Traumatic Concerns Over the Course of the Six Months After Injury
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The primary outcome is the endorsement of ≥1 severe posttraumatic concerns.
  • Change in Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Symptoms Over the Course of the Six Months After Injury
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used the PTSD Checklist – Civilian (PCL-C) as a continuous measure. The scoring of the scale ranges from a minumum of 17 to a maximum of 85, with higher scores indicating a worse outcome. No subscales were used.
  • Change in Depression Symptoms Over the Course of the Six Months After Injury
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as a continuous measure, with scores ranging from 1 to 27. Higher scores represent a worse outcome. No subscales were used.

Secondary Measures

  • Alcohol Use Problems
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as a continuous measure. The 10-item scale score ranges from 0-40, with higher values indicating a worse outcome. No sub scales were used.
  • Functional Status
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form healthy survey (MOS SF-12/36) physical components summary to assess physical function. The minimum and maximum scores are 0-100 with higher scores representing a better outcome. No other subscales will be used.
  • Number of Participants With Suicidal Ideation
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used PHQ-9 item 9 to assess suicidal ideation. For the analysis, a score of > 0 on item 9 of PHQ-9 was considered a positive endorsement and a worse outcome.
  • Number of Patients Carrying a Weapon
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigation used a single yes/no item to assess whether the patient was carrying a weapon.
  • Number of Participants With One or More Emergency Department Visits Over Time
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed emergency department service use over the course of the study.
    • The investigators used population level data on emergency department health service use for the intent-to-treat sample
  • Drug Use Problems
    • Time Frame: The investigators assessed at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month.
    • The investigators used the Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST-10) as a continuous outcome measure. DAST-10 scale scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores representing a worse outcome. No subscales were used.

Participating in This Clinical Trial

Inclusion Criteria

  • Seen in acute care emergency department or trauma center setting for injury – At least three post traumatic concerns – AND One of the following PTSD Checklist Score (PCL-C) greater than or equal to 35 Patient Health Questionnaire 9 – greater than or equal to 10 Any endorsement of suicidal ideation on the PhQ-9 Item 9 Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-English speaking – Under 14 years of age – Incarcerated – Psychotic behavior – Suffered head, spinal cord, or other severe injuries that prevent participation in the inpatient ward interview.

Gender Eligibility: All

Minimum Age: 14 Years

Maximum Age: N/A

Are Healthy Volunteers Accepted: No

Investigator Details

  • Lead Sponsor
    • University of Washington
  • Collaborator
    • Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  • Provider of Information About this Clinical Study
    • Principal Investigator: Douglas Zatzick, Professor – University of Washington
  • Overall Official(s)
    • Douglas Zatzick, MD, Principal Investigator, University of Washington

Clinical trials entries are delivered from the US National Institutes of Health and are not reviewed separately by this site. Please see the identifier information above for retrieving further details from the government database.

At TrialBulletin.com, we keep tabs on over 200,000 clinical trials in the US and abroad, using medical data supplied directly by the US National Institutes of Health. Please see the About and Contact page for details.