Medical Education for Better Multiple Sclerosis Outcomes (EDUCAR MS)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03134794|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : May 1, 2017
Last Update Posted : October 19, 2020
- Study Details
- Tabular View
- No Results Posted
- How to Read a Study Record
The main objectives of this study are:
i) To design an educational tool to train physicians in overcome cognitive factors associated with therapeutic inertia.
ii) To determine the feasibility and efficacy of an educational tool to overcome therapeutic inertia among neurologists caring for MS patients
iii) identify the best strategy to disseminate an educational program to train physicians taking into account regional and practice variations.
iv) To explore whether multiple sclerosis (MS) patients' risk category influence the incidence of therapeutic inertia in neurologists that may require a segmentation strategy in medical education.
v) To assess how participants handle uncertainty when making treatment decisions by measuring pupil variation from baseline (Canadian study).
vi) To evaluate the effect of the TLS on TI by assessing differences pupil variability between the intervention and control groups (Canadian study).
A multicenter, randomized, study including an educational intervention (applying the traffic light system) to overcome therapeutic inertia in MS care.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Multiple Sclerosis||Behavioral: Educational intervention applying the traffic light system (TLS)||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||90 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Investigator)|
|Primary Purpose:||Supportive Care|
|Official Title:||Decision Making Under Uncertainty in MS Care: an Innovative Educational Intervention Applying Concepts From Neuroeconomics|
|Actual Study Start Date :||March 22, 2017|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||October 30, 2018|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||October 30, 2018|
Experimental: Educational Intervention
Education intervention using the TLS. The active group will received an educational intervention applying proven concepts in medical education (cognitive reflection/checklist, traffic light system (TLS). Previous research showed that TL food labels prompted individuals to consider their health and to make healthier choices. A color-coded system influences the valuation process in favor of healthier choices by interfering with automatic decisions and triggering the re-evaluation process (Ena, Krajbich et al Judgement and DM 2016).
The TLS is being implemented to facilitate the identification of patients at risk of developing a clinical and radiological progression that could result in escalation of therapy.
Behavioral: Educational intervention applying the traffic light system (TLS)
The TLS emerged to facilitate consumers' decisions. It has been applyied in medical decision making.
No Intervention: Control
Usual Care. The control group will make therapeutic decisions without being exposed to the educational intervention as part of the current standard practice.
- Feasibility of the educational intervention [ Time Frame: At the completion of the study, an estimated total of 60 minutes ]defined as the proportion of participants in the educational intervention who selected the 'red" traffic light for high risk cases. It is expected a 70% or higher proportion of correct responses
- The proportion of participants who exhibit therapeutic inertia [ Time Frame: At the completion of the study, an estimated total of 60 minutes ]
defined as lack of treatment escalation when the goals of care are unmet based on best practice guidelines.
We will compare the total number of responses between groups post-intervention (total number of responses that met the TI criteria over total number of questions answered per participant.
- Pupil dilation from baseline (Primary outcome of the study conducted in Canada) [ Time Frame: Up to 60 min ]Pupil time-series were z-scored within each participant, to allow comparison of pupil dilation between and within simulated case-scenarios, critical time-periods, and participants. Pupil data will be analyzed as a continuous (mean maximum peak minus mean baseline and mean pupil size minus mean baseline) and dichotomized to reflect phasic and tonic arousal responses (mean maximum-peak minus mean-baseline greater than or equal to 0.1 z-scored difference as a high arousal vs. below 0.1 z-scored difference -low arousal response).
- Efficacy of the educational intervention [ Time Frame: At the completion of the study, approximately 60 minutes ]Difference in the proportion of participants with decision fatigue between groups (measured as the difference between proportion of cases with therapeutic inertia post-intervention minus proportion of cases with therapeutic inertia pre-intervention).
- Scale (based on the experiment on ambiguity aversion) [ Time Frame: At the completion of the study, approximately 60 minutes ]association between ambiguity and risk aversion (independent variables) with therapeutic decisions. Ambiguity aversion is defined as a preference for known risks over unknown risks. This can be elicited through the experiments in the health and financial domains.
- Scale (physician reaction to uncertainty) [ Time Frame: At the completion of the study, approximately 60 minutes ]Using the 'physicians reaction to uncertainty" instrument as a continuous variable and median split.
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contacts provided below. For general information, Learn About Clinical Studies.
|Ages Eligible for Study:||23 Years to 75 Years (Adult, Older Adult)|
|Sexes Eligible for Study:||All|
|Accepts Healthy Volunteers:||Yes|
- Practicing neurologists and MS specialists caring for patients with MS
- Clinical setting: academic or community institutions
- Certified physicians in their specialty
- Online consent to participate in the study
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03134794
|Buenos Aires, Ciudad De Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1642|
|St Michael's Hospital|
|Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5C 1R6|
|Clinica Las Condes|
|Principal Investigator:||Gustavo Saposnik||University of Toronto|
Publications of Results:
Publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):
|Responsible Party:||Unity Health Toronto|
|Other Study ID Numbers:||
|First Posted:||May 1, 2017 Key Record Dates|
|Last Update Posted:||October 19, 2020|
|Last Verified:||October 2020|
|Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:|
|Plan to Share IPD:||No|
|Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:||No|
|Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:||No|
traffic light system
aversion to ambiguity
disease modifying agents
Demyelinating Autoimmune Diseases, CNS
Autoimmune Diseases of the Nervous System
Nervous System Diseases
Immune System Diseases