search
Back to results

PARTNER II: Improving Patient and Family Centered Care in Advanced Critical Illness

Primary Purpose

Anxiety, Depression

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
PARTNER II
Sponsored by
University of Pittsburgh
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional supportive care trial for Anxiety focused on measuring decision making for incapacitated patients, intensive care, surrogate decision making, patient centered care, palliative care

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years of age or older
  • Surrogate decision maker for ICU patient in one of 5 UPMC ICU's

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-English Speaking
  • Surrogate's loved one is for organ transplantation
  • Not physically able to participate in family meeting

Sites / Locations

  • UPMC Hamot
  • UPMC Presby/Shady

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

No Intervention

Experimental

Arm Label

Control

Behavioral: The PARTNER II Intervention

Arm Description

The control group will receive usual care, in which the frequency and content of physician-family communication is determined by the clinical team according to their usual practice. No study ICU has a protocolized approach to family communication and instead clinicians determine the timing and frequency of communication with families. All sites have palliative care services.

The PARTNER intervention is a multifaceted intervention delivered by a trained "PARTNER Champion" who has undergone 16 hours of intense communication training, with audit and feedback, quarterly booster training, and expert implementation support. Additionally, there is academic detailing of ICU physicians and ICU bedside nurses to augment the intervention. The PARTNER Intervention deploys three strategies to improve: 1) the timeliness and frequency of clinician-family communication, 2) the emotional and decision support provided to families and 3) the appropriate involvement of palliative care specialists.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Quality of Communication (QOC) scale
We will assess quality of communication in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated13 item Quality of Communication Scale.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
We will assess symptom burden of anxiety and depression in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS).
Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale
We will assess Patient Centeredness of Care, using the 12-item Patient-Perceived Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale (PPPC) adapted for use by surrogates.
Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay
We will assess the Intensive Care Unit length of stay as assessed by abstraction of this information from the medical record.
Impact of Events Scale
We will assess symptoms of post-traumatic stress in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 22 item Impact of Events Scale.
Decision Regret Scale
We will assess Decisional Regret by family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 5 item Decision Regret Scale across treatment groups.

Full Information

First Posted
May 13, 2015
Last Updated
October 12, 2019
Sponsor
University of Pittsburgh
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02445937
Brief Title
PARTNER II: Improving Patient and Family Centered Care in Advanced Critical Illness
Official Title
Stepped Wedge Trial of an Intervention to Support Proxy Decision Makers in ICUs
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
October 2019
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
June 1, 2015 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
September 18, 2019 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
September 18, 2019 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Pittsburgh

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
This is a stepped wedged randomized controlled trial comparing the PARTNER intervention with usual care in 5 Intensive Care Units. The overarching goal of this research project to ensure patient-centered decisions about the use of intensive treatments for patients with advanced critical illness. In a prior project, the investigators developed the PARTNER program (PAiring Re-engineered ICU Teams with Nurse-driven Education and OutReach), a 4-facet, team-based intervention that re-engineers how surrogates are supported in ICUs, including: 1) changing care "defaults" to ensure clinician-family meetings within 48 hours of enrollment and frequently thereafter; 2) protocolized, nurse-administered coaching and emotional support of surrogates before and during clinician-family meetings, 3) increased use of palliative care services for patients with a poor prognosis. The investigators propose to begin deployment of the PARTNER II program in the spring of 2015 enrolling 690 surrogate decision makers in 5 ICUs using a stepped wedge design. The investigators expect to achieve the following project goals: To increase the patient-centeredness of end-of-life decisions, and to increase the quality of clinician-family communication. To decrease the psychological burden on family members acting as surrogates. To reduce total health care costs by decreasing the duration of use of burdensome, invasive treatments at the end of life.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Anxiety, Depression
Keywords
decision making for incapacitated patients, intensive care, surrogate decision making, patient centered care, palliative care

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Supportive Care
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Sequential Assignment
Model Description
Stepped Wedge Design
Masking
Outcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
848 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Control
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
The control group will receive usual care, in which the frequency and content of physician-family communication is determined by the clinical team according to their usual practice. No study ICU has a protocolized approach to family communication and instead clinicians determine the timing and frequency of communication with families. All sites have palliative care services.
Arm Title
Behavioral: The PARTNER II Intervention
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The PARTNER intervention is a multifaceted intervention delivered by a trained "PARTNER Champion" who has undergone 16 hours of intense communication training, with audit and feedback, quarterly booster training, and expert implementation support. Additionally, there is academic detailing of ICU physicians and ICU bedside nurses to augment the intervention. The PARTNER Intervention deploys three strategies to improve: 1) the timeliness and frequency of clinician-family communication, 2) the emotional and decision support provided to families and 3) the appropriate involvement of palliative care specialists.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
PARTNER II
Intervention Description
The PARTNER intervention is a multifaceted intervention delivered by a trained "PARTNER Champion" who has undergone 16 hours of intense communication training, with audit and feedback, quarterly booster training, and expert implementation support. Additionally, there is academic detailing of ICU physicians and ICU bedside nurses to augment the intervention. The PARTNER Intervention deploys three strategies to improve: 1) the timeliness and frequency of clinician-family communication, 2) the emotional and decision support provided to families and 3) the appropriate involvement of palliative care specialists.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Quality of Communication (QOC) scale
Description
We will assess quality of communication in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated13 item Quality of Communication Scale.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Description
We will assess symptom burden of anxiety and depression in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS).
Time Frame
At 6 months
Title
Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale
Description
We will assess Patient Centeredness of Care, using the 12-item Patient-Perceived Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale (PPPC) adapted for use by surrogates.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Title
Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay
Description
We will assess the Intensive Care Unit length of stay as assessed by abstraction of this information from the medical record.
Time Frame
Participants will be followed for duration of ICU stay, an expected average of 21 days
Title
Impact of Events Scale
Description
We will assess symptoms of post-traumatic stress in family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 22 item Impact of Events Scale.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Title
Decision Regret Scale
Description
We will assess Decisional Regret by family members in a telephone interview 6 months after enrollment using the validated 5 item Decision Regret Scale across treatment groups.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Mortality
Description
We will assess hospital mortality and 6-month mortality using hospital records, 6 month follow-up with surrogates, and the National Death Index in cases in which participants are lost to telephone follow up.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Title
Katz Activities of Daily Living Scale
Description
We will assess functional status of the patient using the validated Katz Activities of Daily Living Scale at 6 months.
Time Frame
At 6 months
Title
Hospital Length of Stay
Description
We will assess hospital length of stay by abstraction of this information from the medical record at hospital discharge.
Time Frame
Participants will be followed for duration of hospital stay, an expected average of 4 weeks.
Title
Total Hospitalization costs
Description
We will measure total hospitalization costs by aggregating each patient's total service specific costs, generated from hospital administrative records.
Time Frame
Inclusive of index hospitalization
Title
6-month health care utilization
Description
We will assess patient health care utilization using hospital records and through validated methods to assess utilization using standardized interviews with surrogates at 6 months.
Time Frame
Inclusive of index hospitalization and 6 months follow up

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: 18 years of age or older Surrogate decision maker for ICU patient in one of 5 UPMC ICU's Exclusion Criteria: Non-English Speaking Surrogate's loved one is for organ transplantation Not physically able to participate in family meeting
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Douglas B. White, MD, MAS
Organizational Affiliation
University of Pittsburgh
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
UPMC Hamot
City
Erie
State/Province
Pennsylvania
ZIP/Postal Code
16550
Country
United States
Facility Name
UPMC Presby/Shady
City
Pittsburgh
State/Province
Pennsylvania
ZIP/Postal Code
15216
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
15090940
Citation
Angus DC, Barnato AE, Linde-Zwirble WT, Weissfeld LA, Watson RS, Rickert T, Rubenfeld GD; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ICU End-Of-Life Peer Group. Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an epidemiologic study. Crit Care Med. 2004 Mar;32(3):638-43. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000114816.62331.08.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9769276
Citation
Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM. A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Oct;158(4):1163-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9801108.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15665319
Citation
Azoulay E, Pochard F, Kentish-Barnes N, Chevret S, Aboab J, Adrie C, Annane D, Bleichner G, Bollaert PE, Darmon M, Fassier T, Galliot R, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Goulenok C, Goldgran-Toledano D, Hayon J, Jourdain M, Kaidomar M, Laplace C, Larche J, Liotier J, Papazian L, Poisson C, Reignier J, Saidi F, Schlemmer B; FAMIREA Study Group. Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005 May 1;171(9):987-94. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200409-1295OC. Epub 2005 Jan 21.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21357911
Citation
Wendler D, Rid A. Systematic review: the effect on surrogates of making treatment decisions for others. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Mar 1;154(5):336-46. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-5-201103010-00008.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9005760
Citation
Lynn J, Teno JM, Phillips RS, Wu AW, Desbiens N, Harrold J, Claessens MT, Wenger N, Kreling B, Connors AF Jr. Perceptions by family members of the dying experience of older and seriously ill patients. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jan 15;126(2):97-106. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-2-199701150-00001.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8302322
Citation
Murphy DJ, Burrows D, Santilli S, Kemp AW, Tenner S, Kreling B, Teno J. The influence of the probability of survival on patients' preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. N Engl J Med. 1994 Feb 24;330(8):545-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199402243300807.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9624023
Citation
Weeks JC, Cook EF, O'Day SJ, Peterson LM, Wenger N, Reding D, Harrell FE, Kussin P, Dawson NV, Connors AF Jr, Lynn J, Phillips RS. Relationship between cancer patients' predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences. JAMA. 1998 Jun 3;279(21):1709-14. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.21.1709. Erratum In: JAMA 2000 Jan 12;283(2):203.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20148984
Citation
Riley GF, Lubitz JD. Long-term trends in Medicare payments in the last year of life. Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr;45(2):565-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01082.x. Epub 2010 Feb 9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11463076
Citation
Hogan C, Lunney J, Gabel J, Lynn J. Medicare beneficiaries' costs of care in the last year of life. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001 Jul-Aug;20(4):188-95. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.20.4.188.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11932474
Citation
Fried TR, Bradley EH, Towle VR, Allore H. Understanding the treatment preferences of seriously ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2002 Apr 4;346(14):1061-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa012528.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20713793
Citation
Sudore RL, Fried TR. Redefining the "planning" in advance care planning: preparing for end-of-life decision making. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Aug 17;153(4):256-61. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-4-201008170-00008.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12952998
Citation
Schneiderman LJ, Gilmer T, Teetzel HD, Dugan DO, Blustein J, Cranford R, Briggs KB, Komatsu GI, Goodman-Crews P, Cohn F, Young EW. Effect of ethics consultations on nonbeneficial life-sustaining treatments in the intensive care setting: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003 Sep 3;290(9):1166-72. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.9.1166.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17267907
Citation
Lautrette A, Darmon M, Megarbane B, Joly LM, Chevret S, Adrie C, Barnoud D, Bleichner G, Bruel C, Choukroun G, Curtis JR, Fieux F, Galliot R, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Georges H, Goldgran-Toledano D, Jourdain M, Loubert G, Reignier J, Saidi F, Souweine B, Vincent F, Barnes NK, Pochard F, Schlemmer B, Azoulay E. A communication strategy and brochure for relatives of patients dying in the ICU. N Engl J Med. 2007 Feb 1;356(5):469-78. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa063446. Erratum In: N Engl J Med. 2007 Jul 12;357(2):203.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
3723709
Citation
Bedell SE, Pelle D, Maher PL, Cleary PD. Do-not-resuscitate orders for critically ill patients in the hospital. How are they used and what is their impact? JAMA. 1986 Jul 11;256(2):233-7.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9539075
Citation
Eidelman LA, Jakobson DJ, Pizov R, Geber D, Leibovitz L, Sprung CL. Foregoing life-sustaining treatment in an Israeli ICU. Intensive Care Med. 1998 Feb;24(2):162-6. doi: 10.1007/s001340050539.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8082372
Citation
Faber-Langendoen K. The clinical management of dying patients receiving mechanical ventilation. A survey of physician practice. Chest. 1994 Sep;106(3):880-8. doi: 10.1378/chest.106.3.880.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9267945
Citation
Keenan SP, Busche KD, Chen LM, McCarthy L, Inman KJ, Sibbald WJ. A retrospective review of a large cohort of patients undergoing the process of withholding or withdrawal of life support. Crit Care Med. 1997 Aug;25(8):1324-31. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199708000-00019.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8306681
Citation
Koch KA, Rodeffer HD, Wears RL. Changing patterns of terminal care management in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1994 Feb;22(2):233-43. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199402000-00013.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
2296273
Citation
Smedira NG, Evans BH, Grais LS, Cohen NH, Lo B, Cooke M, Schecter WP, Fink C, Epstein-Jaffe E, May C, et al. Withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. N Engl J Med. 1990 Feb 1;322(5):309-15. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199002013220506.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
7802736
Citation
Vernon DD, Dean JM, Timmons OD, Banner W Jr, Allen-Webb EM. Modes of death in the pediatric intensive care unit: withdrawal and limitation of supportive care. Crit Care Med. 1993 Nov;21(11):1798-802. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199311000-00035.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
2721211
Citation
Vincent JL, Parquier JN, Preiser JC, Brimioulle S, Kahn RJ. Terminal events in the intensive care unit: review of 258 fatal cases in one year. Crit Care Med. 1989 Jun;17(6):530-3. doi: 10.1097/00003246-198906000-00009.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
3964898
Citation
Youngner SJ, Lewandowski W, McClish DK, Juknialis BW, Coulton C, Bartlett ET. 'Do not resuscitate' orders. Incidence and implications in a medical-intensive care unit. JAMA. 1985 Jan 4;253(1):54-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.253.1.54.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12915432
Citation
Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P, Baras M, Bulow HH, Hovilehto S, Ledoux D, Lippert A, Maia P, Phelan D, Schobersberger W, Wennberg E, Woodcock T; Ethicus Study Group. End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study. JAMA. 2003 Aug 13;290(6):790-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.6.790.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9001282
Citation
Prendergast TJ, Luce JM. Increasing incidence of withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997 Jan;155(1):15-20. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.155.1.9001282.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12022483
Citation
Kirchhoff KT, Walker L, Hutton A, Spuhler V, Cole BV, Clemmer T. The vortex: families' experiences with death in the intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care. 2002 May;11(3):200-9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
7887760
Citation
Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Garland MJ, Nelson CA. Decisions about life-sustaining treatment. Impact of physicians' behaviors on the family. Arch Intern Med. 1995 Mar 27;155(6):633-8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11302290
Citation
Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Nelson CA, Fields J. Family decision-making to withdraw life-sustaining treatments from hospitalized patients. Nurs Res. 2001 Mar-Apr;50(2):105-15. doi: 10.1097/00006199-200103000-00006.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
7474243
Citation
A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments (SUPPORT). The SUPPORT Principal Investigators. JAMA. 1995 Nov 22-29;274(20):1591-8. Erratum In: JAMA 1996 Apr 24;275(16):1232.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9214246
Citation
Hofmann JC, Wenger NS, Davis RB, Teno J, Connors AF Jr, Desbiens N, Lynn J, Phillips RS. Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preference for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jul 1;127(1):1-12. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-1-199707010-00001.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22859524
Citation
Curtis JR, Engelberg RA, Bensink ME, Ramsey SD. End-of-life care in the intensive care unit: can we simultaneously increase quality and reduce costs? Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 Oct 1;186(7):587-92. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201206-1020CP. Epub 2012 Aug 2.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11897638
Citation
Luce JM, Rubenfeld GD. Can health care costs be reduced by limiting intensive care at the end of life? Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Mar 15;165(6):750-4. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.165.6.2109045. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21972313
Citation
White DB, Arnold RM. The evolution of advance directives. JAMA. 2011 Oct 5;306(13):1485-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1430. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15695421
Citation
Hawkins NA, Ditto PH, Danks JH, Smucker WD. Micromanaging death: process preferences, values, and goals in end-of-life medical decision making. Gerontologist. 2005 Feb;45(1):107-17. doi: 10.1093/geront/45.1.107.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19205027
Citation
Song MK, Ward SE, Happ MB, Piraino B, Donovan HS, Shields AM, Connolly MC. Randomized controlled trial of SPIRIT: an effective approach to preparing African-American dialysis patients and families for end of life. Res Nurs Health. 2009 Jun;32(3):260-73. doi: 10.1002/nur.20320.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9508265
Citation
Danis M. Improving end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: what's to be learned from outcomes research? New Horiz. 1998 Feb;6(1):110-8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25057643
Citation
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Identifying Priority Areas for Quality Improvement; Adams K, Corrigan JM, editors. Priority Areas for National Action: Transforming Health Care Quality. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2003. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK221294/
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24983041
Citation
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, at the Institute of Medicine. The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK209880/
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
32229520
Citation
Lincoln T, Shields AM, Buddadhumaruk P, Chang CH, Pike F, Chen H, Brown E, Kozar V, Pidro C, Kahn JM, Darby JM, Martin S, Angus DC, Arnold RM, White DB. Protocol for a randomised trial of an interprofessional team-delivered intervention to support surrogate decision-makers in ICUs. BMJ Open. 2020 Mar 29;10(3):e033521. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033521.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

PARTNER II: Improving Patient and Family Centered Care in Advanced Critical Illness

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs