A Culturally Sensitive Values-Guided Aid for End of Life Decision-Making
| Tracking Information | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Received Date ICMJE | July 18, 2005 | ||||
| Last Updated Date | April 18, 2013 | ||||
| Start Date ICMJE | December 2004 | ||||
| Primary Completion Date | September 2009 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Observational study - end of life decision making [ Time Frame: 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] | ||||
| Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Change History | Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00122135 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site | ||||
| Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Descriptive Information | |||||
| Brief Title ICMJE | A Culturally Sensitive Values-Guided Aid for End of Life Decision-Making | ||||
| Official Title ICMJE | A Culturally Sensitive Values-Guided Aid for End of Life Decision-Making | ||||
| Brief Summary | The goal of this research agenda is to improve the quality of end-of-life care by explicitly identifying values that will guide the decision-making process, with a particular emphasis on the role of ethnic, racial and cultural factors. |
||||
| Detailed Description | Background: End-of-life decision-making is an important aspect of providing quality healthcare, especially for the elderly population. Increasingly, the appropriateness of many of these decisions is being questioned. Some invasive procedures done in seriously ill patients do not significantly alter their course, many patients die without having pain or other symptoms addressed, and families may feel dissatisfied with the care provided. Additionally, there are striking racial/ethnic disparities in end-of-life care. Objectives: The explicit identification of values that guide medical decision-making could improve the decision-making process for end-of-life care for patients of all races/ethnicities. 1) We will directly compare, critically assess, and revise two Values Histories on the basis of qualitative data derived from individual interviews with racially/ethnically diverse patients and surrogates, and explore patients', surrogates', and physicians' values, preferences and concerns that guide decision-making about medical interventions at the end-of-life. 2) We will then adapt the existing Values Histories into a clinically practical tool, the Values Inventory discussion aid. 3) We will conduct preliminary testing of this tool to be used in physician-patient or physician-surrogate encounters to improve and facilitate decisions about end-of-life care. Methods: Cross-sectional qualitative study using individual interviews with racially-ethnically diverse seriously ill patients and surrogates, and focus group interviews with physicians. Eligible patients are at risk for 6-12-month mortality with one of the following diagnoses: congestive heart failure, with ejection fraction of less than 25%; severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/emphysema with dependence on oxygen; chronic liver disease with cirrhosis and ascites; colon carcinoma with liver metastases; or non-small cell cancer of the lung, stage III or IV. All (patient) participants are age 55 years or older and are recruited through the clinics/wards at the Houston VAMC. Surrogates are surrogates of patients with such conditions; physicians are generalists and medical subspecialists. To achieve objective 3, a small randomized trial to test the feasibility of using the developed Values Inventory discussion aid in clinical practice will be done. Findings: Regardless of race/ethnicity, surrogates for seriously ill patients appeared to experience increased significant, multidimensional burdens of decision making under conditions of uncertainty about a patient's preferences. This aspect of the burden of surrogate decision making may not be fully appreciated by physicians. Physicians should identify and be especially attentive to strategies used by surrogates, which may vary by race/ethnicity, to reduce the uncertainty about a patient's preferences and thus the burden of surrogate decision making to assist them in this difficult process. Based on the responses of participants in Phase I, the instrument was refined and a more culturally sensitive instrument was presented to participants in Phase II. Recruitment of Hispanic patients for Phase II was challenging since the older Hispanic population at MEDVAMC is much smaller than the black or white population. Status: We screened 3250 patients for eligibility into the study (objective 1), identified 192 eligible subjects, 169 subjects were contacted and 65 (38%) agreed to participate. 33 surrogates and 38 patients (African Americans, Hispanics, and whites) completed structured interviews (4 subjects did not complete both interviews). All interviews were transcribed and data managed with Atlas Ti. The Values Inventory discussion aid was created based on the interviews. For the last phase (objective 3) 23,787 patients were screened for eligibility, identified 642 eligible subjects, and of those 128 patients completed the intervention. 4 case studies with surrogates were also completed. Interviews were transcribed and data analysis using Atlas Ti is ongoing. Impact: This project lays the foundation for formally testing the efficacy of the Values Inventory in a larger clinical trial. The long-term goal of this research agenda is to improve the quality of end-of-life care by explicitly identifying values that guide the decision-making process, with particular emphasis on the role of ethnic, racial and cultural factors. |
||||
| Study Type ICMJE | Observational | ||||
| Study Design ICMJE | Observational Model: Cohort Time Perspective: Prospective |
||||
| Target Follow-Up Duration | Not Provided | ||||
| Biospecimen | Not Provided | ||||
| Sampling Method | Non-Probability Sample | ||||
| Study Population | Primary care clinic at a large tertiary VA Medical Center |
||||
| Condition ICMJE |
|
||||
| Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||
| Study Group/Cohort (s) | Group 1
patients and surrogates
Interventions:
|
||||
| Publications * |
|
||||
|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||
| Recruitment Information | |||||
| Recruitment Status ICMJE | Completed | ||||
| Enrollment ICMJE | 203 | ||||
| Completion Date | September 2009 | ||||
| Primary Completion Date | September 2009 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||
| Gender | Both | ||||
| Ages | 55 Years and older | ||||
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No | ||||
| Contacts ICMJE | Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects | ||||
| Location Countries ICMJE | United States | ||||
| Administrative Information | |||||
| NCT Number ICMJE | NCT00122135 | ||||
| Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | IIR 02-224 | ||||
| Has Data Monitoring Committee | No | ||||
| Responsible Party | Department of Veterans Affairs | ||||
| Study Sponsor ICMJE | Department of Veterans Affairs | ||||
| Collaborators ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Investigators ICMJE |
|
||||
| Information Provided By | Department of Veterans Affairs | ||||
| Verification Date | September 2009 | ||||
|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |
|||||