NIH Collaboratory

March 13, 2019: PROVEN Publishes Study of Nursing Home Characteristics Associated With Implementation of an Advance Care Planning Video Intervention

Posted on by Gina Uhlenbrauck

The NIH Collaboratory Trial Pragmatic Trial of Video Education in Nursing Homes (PROVEN) is testing the effectiveness of a novel advance care planning (ACP) video education program in 360 nursing homes within 2 large nursing home healthcare systems. The investigators of PROVEN recently published a study that examines the characteristics of nursing homes associated with implementation of the video. They found that lower quality nursing homes (rated 1 star) had lower offer rates than higher quality nursing homes, suggesting that ongoing support might be necessary in these settings, as well as engagement with a local champion.

ACP is a process by which individuals define their future goals and preferences for medical treatment at the end of life and discuss these goals with their family and healthcare providers. ACP is especially important for nursing home residents, who often receive unnecessary care and experience burdensome transitions at the end of life. The ACP intervention in PROVEN is delivered by an onsite champion at the facility—usually a social worker with structured training in how and when to offer and show the ACP videos to residents and families.

 “These results have implications for future pragmatic trials in the NH [nursing home] setting because ongoing engagement between research and NH staff appears crucial for successful integration of interventions into routine clinical practice. Future research is needed to understand how to best engage NHs in implementation and encourage communication between NHs to share pragmatic strategies for improving clinical practice without the support of research staff.”

– Loomer et al. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

March 6, 2018: Results of the Active Bathing to Eliminate (ABATE) Infection Trial Published in The Lancet

Posted on by Karen Staman

The Active Bathing to Eliminate (ABATE) Infection trial compared routine bathing to decolonization with universal chlorhexidine and targeted nasal mupirocin in non-critical-care units. Similar interventions have been found to reduce multidrug-resistant pathogens and bloodstream infections in intensive care units (ICUs), and this was the first large-scale trial in non-critical-care units. The primary outcome was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) clinical cultures attributed to participating units.

“We found that universal decolonization did not reduce infection in the overall population, but in post-hoc analyses of patients with medical devices the regimen was associated with significant reductions in all-cause bloodstream infections and MRSA or VRE clinical cultures.” —Huang et al. The Lancet 2019

The ABATE Infection trial was a large-scale pragmatic trial involving approximately189,000 patients in the baseline period and 340,000 patients in the intervention period across 194 non-critical-care units in 53 hospitals. The trial was one of the first NIH Collaboratory Trials, and in keeping with the Collaboratory’s mission, the investigators have helped expand the knowledge base about the design, conduct, and dissemination of pragmatic clinical trials.

February 1, 2019: Promoting Effective Advance Care Planning Communication in the Elderly: The ACP-PEACE Trial (James Tulsky, MD, Angelo Volandes, MD, MPH)

Posted on by Gina Uhlenbrauck

Speakers

James Tulsky, MD
Chair, Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Chief, Division of Palliative Medicine
Brigham and Women’s Hospital

Angelo Volandes, MD, MPH
Associate Professor of Medicine
Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard Medical School

Topic

Promoting Effective Advance Care Planning Communication in the Elderly: The ACP-PEACE Trial

Keywords

Pragmatic clinical trial; Advance care planning; ACP PEACE; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; National Institute on Aging; Palliative care; Video declarations; Goal-concordant care; Patient preferences

Key Points

  • Many people with serious illness die without receiving goal-concordant care, and patients over the age of 65 with cancer experience this disproportionately. Helping patients engage in advance care planning (ACP) can empower them to express and record their goals so that their care can be aligned with their preferences.
  • The ACP PEACE NIH Collaboratory Trial is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, randomized trial of a comprehensive ACP program in oncology clinics at 3 health systems. It will involve a combination of 2 evidence-based programs:
    • VitalTalk teaches clinicians important communication skills in having empathic conversations with seriously ill patients.
    • ACP Decisions uses videos to promote planning and decision-making by patients and families.
  • The ACP PEACE study will monitor long-term outcomes to evaluate whether patients received the care they planned for and wanted.

Discussion Themes

The last element of the ACP PEACE trial is a video declaration (ViDec), recorded by a subset of patients. In recording the ViDec, patients are prompted by questions assessing their confidence with their decision, satisfaction, decisional regret, and patient-provider experience.

The ACP PEACE study team has a scaling strategy in place if the intervention proves effective. Implementing the intervention as standard of care will involve a culture shift from what is currently expected in health systems.

Read more about the ACP PEACE NIH Collaboratory Trial in the Living Textbook.

Tags

#AdvanceCarePlanning, #pctGR, @Collaboratory1 @VitalTalk, @ACPDecisions

January 22, 2019: New Self-Paced ePCT Training Course Available

Posted on by Gina Uhlenbrauck

The NIH Collaboratory is pleased to announce the availability of a new self-paced, 10-module introductory course on how to design, conduct, and disseminate embedded PCTs (ePCTs). This course presents condensed material from the inaugural ePCT Training Workshop held in 2018 and provides users with important things to know and do when designing an ePCT, along with helpful links to additional learning resources within the Living Textbook.

Also available in the Living Textbook are links to videocast workshops hosted by the NIH on a range of ePCT topics including:

  • Embedded PCTs of therapeutic A versus B interventions
  • Unique opportunities for disseminating, implementing, and sustaining evidence-based practices into clinical care
  • Ethical and regulatory issues of PCTs

For these and other ePCT resources, visit the Training Resources webpage.

January 18, 2019: NIH Collaboratory Investigators Respond to FDA’s Proposed Rule on Informed Consent

Posted on by Karen Staman

NIH Collaboratory leadership and NIH Collaboratory Trial Principal Investigators have responded to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) proposed rule to allow for a waiver or alteration of informed consent.

“We applaud the proposed rule to allow for a waiver or alteration of informed consent for clinical investigations posing no more than minimal risk to a human participant and including appropriate safeguards.

We agree about the broad benefits described in the proposed rule—healthcare advances, reduction in burden from harmonizing FDA’s regulations with the Common Rule, and reduced burden and costs for the IRB…”

The full letter is available for download and includes the list of signatories.

December 13, 2018: New Living Textbook Chapter: Developing a Compelling Grant Application

Posted on by Karen Staman

A new chapter in the Living Textbook provides expert advice for investigators submitting an application for a pragmatic clinical trial to the NIH. The chapter covers finding the right Program Official and opportunity announcement, writing a strong proposal, addressing review criteria, and award status.

“First and foremost, develop and clearly define a clinical research question with a testable hypothesis and then select an experimental design best suited to answering the research question. The study question drives the research design.” —From Developing a Compelling Grant Application

Dr. Wendy Weber, the Program Officer for the NIH Collaboratory Coordinating Center, and Dr. Marcel Salive, a Program Officer from the National Institute on Aging, contributed to this chapter.

December 11, 2018: Two New NIH Funding Opportunity Announcements for Pragmatic Trials Address the Opioid Crisis

Posted on by Karen Staman

The NIH has announced two new funding opportunity announcements (FOAs) for 7 or more embedded pragmatic clinical trials that address pain management and the opioid crisis. These projects will become part of the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory as phased UG3/UH3 cooperative research.

The two announcements are:

The announcements are part of the NIH Heal (Helping to End Addiction Long-term) Initiative, which was created in April 2018 in an effort to speed scientific solutions for addressing the national opioid public health crisis.

November 13, 2018: Summary of Workshop on Pragmatic Trials of Therapeutic A vs B Interventions Now Available

Posted on by Karen Staman

The NIH Collaboratory recently convened a workshop to explore embedded pragmatic clinical trials comparing two or more therapeutic medical interventions. These “A vs B” trials are meant to test existing, viable treatment alternatives where there is uncertainty about which treatment is best in which populations. There are unique barriers that make these types of pragmatic trials especially challenging to implement. For the workshop, a panel of experts gathered to discuss challenges and solutions regarding partnering with healthcare systems to conduct the trials, unique legal and ethical issues, and design and operational considerations. The summary of the workshop is now available: Workshop Summary: Embedded Pragmatic Clinical Trials of Therapeutic A vs. B Interventions

 

Additional Resources:

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials of therapeutic A vs. B interventions workshop videocast.

 

October 1, 2018: Dr. Greg Simon Uses a Pie Eating Contest Analogy to Explain the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient

Posted on by Karen Staman

In a new video, Dr. Greg Simon explains the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with an analogy to a pie eating contest. The ICC is a descriptive statistic that measures the correlations among members of a group, and it is an important tool for cluster-randomized pragmatic trials because this calculation helps determine the sample size needed to detect an effect.

Greg Simon from NIH Collaboratory on Vimeo.

“When we randomize treatments by doctors, clinics, or even whole health systems, we need to think about how things cluster, and the intraclass correlation coefficient is the measure of that clustering. When we think about sample sizes in pragmatic clinical trials, it’s important to understand what an intraclass correlation coefficient actually is.”

For most pragmatic trials, the ICC will be between 0 and 1. If the outcomes in a group are completely correlated (ICC=1), then all participants within the group are likely to have the same outcome. When ICC=1, sampling one participant from the cluster is as informative as sampling the whole cluster, and many clusters will be needed to detect an effect. If there is no correlation among members of the groups (ICC=0), then the available sample size for the study is essentially the number of participants.

For more on the ICC, see the Intraclass Correlation section in the Living Textbook or this working document from the Collaboratory’s Biostatistics and Study Design Core.

September 14, 2018: Tips for Submitting a Pragmatic Trial Application to NIH

Posted on by Karen Staman

In a new video, Dr. Wendy Weber, the Program Officer for the NIH Collaboratory Coordinating Center, provides some expert advice for investigators who are considering submitting an application for a pragmatic clinical trial to the NIH.

“Don’t assume that the study panel is going to understand what pragmatic means. They may have their own completely different definition than you, and it’s important that you get on the same page early on in your application.” —Wendy Weber, PhD, Acting Deputy Director, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)