Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT04373135
NCT04373135CompletedNot Applicable

A Study to Evaluate Health Behavior and Access Impacts Due to COVID-19 and for Community Engagement of Stakeholders Surrounding Scarce Resource Allocation Policy.

University of California, Los Angeles1 site in 1 country1,971 target enrollmentStarted: May 8, 2020Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
1,971
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Improvement in knowledge surrounding SRA policy

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is affecting the way many people live their lives, including seeking medical care and maintaining good self-care to keep healthy. Additionally, in the event many people become critically ill at once, COVID-19 has the possibility of overwhelming hospitals to the point where they have to make decisions about how to determine who receives intensive care and life-support measures. Many hospitals as well as local or state governments have been working on policies to determine how to make these decisions. This study seeks to learn about how COVID-19 has affected the way patients and healthcare providers care for themselves and about their thoughts and concerns about policies that may "ration" life-support resources.

Detailed Description

Background:

COVID-19 has led to significant disruptions to usual operations of the health care system and routines of millions of people. Regular medical appointments have been preempted or converted to telemedicine, dietary changes have occurred due to food supply chain strain, and exercise regimens altered by physical distancing policies, all of which may affect preventive care and chronic illness management. Additionally, anxiety about risk of developing COVID-19 and the availability of health care resources may alter care-seeking behaviors even for serious conditions, e.g., heart attacks.

Understanding personal health and protective behaviors under threat of COVID-19 is an epidemiologic imperative and can inform immediate public health response as well as planning for population health needs post-crisis.

Critical care capacity during COVID-19 is also a matter of extreme concern. Limitations in capacity, particularly mechanical ventilators have necessitated scarce resource allocation (SRA) policies, which outline triage protocols while observing ethical principles of distributive justice, transparency, and equitability.

In practice, these policies determine which patients are most likely to benefit from intensive care, and some patients with a significantly heightened risk for mortality are less likely to be prioritized in critical care allocation decisions. The uncertainty around prioritization and threat of rationing of care has generated public attention and anxiety evident in medical journals, news outlets, and on social media.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Health Services Research
Masking
None

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • •Participants shall be adults aged 18 years or older
  • •Willingness and ability to participate in an internet-based survey

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Children under age 18

Arms & Interventions

Experimental

Experimental

Subjects will be provided a brief educational intervention prior to completing follow up survey about SRA attitudes and knowledge

Intervention: Brief educational video (Behavioral)

Control

No Intervention

Subjects will not be provided any prior to completing follow up survey about SRA attitudes and knowledge

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Improvement in knowledge surrounding SRA policy

Time Frame: 1 month, 6 months

Improvement in knowledge item score of 1/2 SD points on follow up after intervention delivery and at final follow up

Stability of in anxiety surrounding SRA policy

Time Frame: 1 month, 6 months

No worsening in anxiety scale of 1/2 SD responses on follow up after intervention delivery and at final follow up

Improvement in trust surrounding SRA policy

Time Frame: 1 month, 6 months

Improvement in trust scale of 1/2 SD on follow up after intervention delivery and at final follow up

Secondary Outcomes

No secondary outcomes reported

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Russell G. Buhr, MD, PhD

Principal Investigator

University of California, Los Angeles

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials