Enhancing the Secondary Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease
|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: NCT00175240|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : September 15, 2005
Last Update Posted : July 28, 2015
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Coronary Disease Ischemic Heart Disease||Behavioral: Evidence summaries endorsed by local opinion leaders||Phase 4|
BACKGROUND: Despite the abundant evidence base for secondary prevention, practice audits consistently demonstrate substantial "care gaps" between this evidence and clinical reality such that many patients with Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) are not offered all possible therapies for the prevention of myocardial infarction or death. For example, even after an acute myocardial infarction, almost one fifth of patients continue to smoke; over half with hypertension or hyperlipidemia have poorly controlled pressure or lipid levels; and proven therapies such as statins, ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers and antiplatelet agents are under-prescribed.
Multiple barriers are often responsible for the lack of implementation of proven efficacious therapies and traditional means of educating practitioners (journal articles, CME, conferences, etc) are usually ineffective in altering practice. Clearly novel interventions to improve the quality of prescribing are needed. Local opinion leaders are trusted by their peers to evaluate medical innovations and thus influence practice patterns within their community. Few controlled studies, however, have evaluated their effect on changing prescribing practices for common conditions such as CAD.
HYPOTHESIS: This trial will test 2 quality improvement interventions. The principle hypothesis is: does a one-page evidence summary endorsed by local opinion leaders increase the provision of secondary prevention therapies in patients with CAD compared to usual care? The secondary hypotheses are: does the same intervention but without local opinion leader endorsement improve the provision of secondary prevention strategies in patients with CAD compared to usual care? Does local opinion leader endorsement increase the effectiveness of the quality improvement intervention?
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||480 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Official Title:||Enhancing the Use of Secondary Prevention Strategies in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease (The ESP-CAD Study)|
|Study Start Date :||March 2005|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||August 2011|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||July 2015|
- Composite measure representing improvement in cholesterol-related secondary prevention consisting of (1) provision of a statin sample (2) provision of a statin prescription or (3) dosage increase of a statin within the first 6 months post-angiogram.
- Provision of other proven efficacious medications for coronary artery disease by 6 months including ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers and antiplatelet agents.
- Changes in the provision of other lipid lowering medications.
- Smoking rates - receipt of smoking cessation advice/nicotine replacement products/bupropion.
- Repeat fasting lipid panel within 6 months post-angiogram.
- Proportion of patients achieving target LDL-C of 2.0mmol/l or less.
- Clinical events including myocardial infarction, stroke, admissions for coronary artery disease, total hospitalizations and mortality.
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): NCT00175240
|University of Alberta Hospital; Royal Alexandra Hospital, Foothills Medical Centre (Calgary)|
|Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2B7|
|Principal Investigator:||Finlay McAlister, MD,MSc||University of Alberta|