search
Back to results

Assessment of Patient Reported Health Status Questions Via Four Different Methods of Administration, in Stroke Survivors.

Primary Purpose

Stroke, Cerebral Infarction, Cerebral Hemorrhage

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United Kingdom
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
15 Patient Reported Health Status Questions
Sponsored by
Dr Jonathan Hewitt
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional health services research trial for Stroke focused on measuring PROM, Patient Reported Outcome Measure, PROMIS, PROMIS-10, PROMIS Global Health, RiksStroke, ICHOM, International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Wales, Administration, Method, Delivery

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Clinically confirmed diagnosis of stroke either Cerebral Infarct (ICD I63), Cerebrovascular Haemorrhage (ICD161) or Stroke, not specified as haemorrhage or infarction (ICD I64).
  • Patients over 18 years old (≥ 18 years old)
  • Had a diagnosis of stroke within the last 4-8 months (Stroke diagnosis ≥ 4months to ≤ 8 months)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of a Transient Ischaemic Attack (ICD G45)
  • Diagnosis of a Subarachnoid Haemorrhage (ICD I60)

Sites / Locations

  • Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr
  • Royal Gwent Hospital
  • Nevill Hall Hospital
  • Prince Charles Hospital

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm 4

Arm Type

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Arm Label

Postal Questionnaire

Online Questionnaire

Face-to-face Questionnaire

Telephone Questionnaire

Arm Description

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Total response rate for all 4 methods of delivery
As defined by response rate. This will be measured by the number of individuals that return the questionnaire for each of the four allocation groups.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions with people with communication issues (e.g. aphasia)
Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions by stroke severity (as defined by NIHSS on admission)
Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions by stroke type (as defined by ICD classification)

Full Information

First Posted
May 26, 2017
Last Updated
July 24, 2018
Sponsor
Dr Jonathan Hewitt
Collaborators
Stroke Implementation Group (Wales)
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03177161
Brief Title
Assessment of Patient Reported Health Status Questions Via Four Different Methods of Administration, in Stroke Survivors.
Official Title
Assessment of Patient Reported Health Status Questions Via Four Different Methods of Administration, in Stroke Survivors. A Randomised Controlled Trial. A Non-inferiority Study of the Response Rate for Four Alternative Methods of Administration of 15 Patient Reported Health Status Questions in Stroke Survivors.
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
July 2018
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
August 12, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
January 15, 2018 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 1, 2018 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor-Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Dr Jonathan Hewitt
Collaborators
Stroke Implementation Group (Wales)

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
A Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) is a questionnaire that asks patients for their views on their own health or the impact of healthcare they have received on their health and quality of life (RCN, 2011). The benefit of PROMS is that they gather information from the patient's perspective, which offers great potential to improve the quality and outcomes of health services (Department of Health 2011). There is a PROM (the PROMIS-10 Global Health) and a number of extra questions that are recommended for use in people who have had a stroke by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, but the best way of delivering these questions for stroke survivors is unknown. At present, the NHS in England, Scotland and Wales are required to offer every stroke survivors a 6 month post stroke follow-up appointment. Currently, the information collected at the 6 month review is not from the patient's perspective and the best method of collecting this information has not been established. The Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) which is led by the Royal College of Physicians in London promote the 6 month follow-up assessment. SSNAP recognise that currently 4 different methods of 6 month follow-up appointment occur. The current methods in use are face-to-face assessment, telephone interview, online questionnaire or postal questionnaire. The aim of this research is to understand if there is a difference between these 4 methods of delivering these questions in people who have had a stroke. As part of the 6 month review this research study will assess the response rate for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions across the 4 recognised methods of delivery; Face-to-Face Telephone Online Post To conduct this research study a sample of 808 stroke survivors will be asked to take part in the research. From these 808 people, 202 participants will be randomly assigned to each method of administration (Face-to-Face Interview, Telephone Interview, Postal Questionnaire and Online Questionnaire). The questionnaires received by the research team will not record any personally identifiable information. The data will then be utilised by the researchers for statistical analysis in order to identify, which method of the 4 methods of administration, under investigation, is the most acceptable for stroke survivors. The conclusions of this research will inform the roll-out of the most appropriate method of delivering the 6 month stroke follow-up review for stroke survivors.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Stroke, Cerebral Infarction, Cerebral Hemorrhage, Stroke Hemorrhagic, Stroke, Ischemic, Stroke of Uncertain Pathology
Keywords
PROM, Patient Reported Outcome Measure, PROMIS, PROMIS-10, PROMIS Global Health, RiksStroke, ICHOM, International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Wales, Administration, Method, Delivery

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Health Services Research
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Masking Description
Participants will not be made aware of the other modes of delivery available and will be assigned a single method of delivery prior to consent.
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
472 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Postal Questionnaire
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Title
Online Questionnaire
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Title
Face-to-face Questionnaire
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Title
Telephone Questionnaire
Arm Type
Experimental
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
15 Patient Reported Health Status Questions
Intervention Description
The PROMIS-10 Global Health, three single item questions (ambulation, toileting, and dressing) that have been borrowed from the RiksStroke (The National Quality Register for Stroke - Sweden) and two further questions on feeding and communication have been included from the ICHOM Standard Set for Stroke.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Total response rate for all 4 methods of delivery
Description
As defined by response rate. This will be measured by the number of individuals that return the questionnaire for each of the four allocation groups.
Time Frame
120 to 240 days post index event
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions with people with communication issues (e.g. aphasia)
Time Frame
120 to 240 days post index event
Title
Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions by stroke severity (as defined by NIHSS on admission)
Time Frame
120 to 240 days post index event
Title
Total response rate across the four different methods of administration for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions by stroke type (as defined by ICD classification)
Time Frame
120 to 240 days post index event

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Clinically confirmed diagnosis of stroke either Cerebral Infarct (ICD I63), Cerebrovascular Haemorrhage (ICD161) or Stroke, not specified as haemorrhage or infarction (ICD I64). Patients over 18 years old (≥ 18 years old) Had a diagnosis of stroke within the last 4-8 months (Stroke diagnosis ≥ 4months to ≤ 8 months) Exclusion Criteria: Diagnosis of a Transient Ischaemic Attack (ICD G45) Diagnosis of a Subarachnoid Haemorrhage (ICD I60)
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jonathan Hewitt, MBBS, FRCP (Glas), MSc, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
Cardiff University & Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr
City
Ystrad Mynach
State/Province
Caerphilly
ZIP/Postal Code
CF82 7EP
Country
United Kingdom
Facility Name
Royal Gwent Hospital
City
Newport
State/Province
Gwent
ZIP/Postal Code
NP20 2UB
Country
United Kingdom
Facility Name
Nevill Hall Hospital
City
Abergavenny
State/Province
Monmouthshire
ZIP/Postal Code
NP7 7EG
Country
United Kingdom
Facility Name
Prince Charles Hospital
City
Merthyr Tydfil
ZIP/Postal Code
CF47 9DT
Country
United Kingdom

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
29970156
Citation
Smith A, Pennington A, Carter B, Gething S, Price M, White J, Dewar R, Hewitt J. Acceptability of the method of administration of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with stroke survivors, a randomised controlled trial protocol. Trials. 2018 Jul 3;19(1):349. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2694-4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31262317
Citation
Hewitt J, Pennington A, Smith A, Gething S, Price M, White J, Dewar R, Carter B. A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors. BMC Med. 2019 Jul 2;17(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Assessment of Patient Reported Health Status Questions Via Four Different Methods of Administration, in Stroke Survivors.

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs