A Prospective Randomized Trial Using Video Images in Advance Care Planning in Seriously Ill Hospitalized Patients

Not Applicable

• Conditions: Decision Making; Video Decision Aids
• Interventions: Other: video decision aid

• Registration Number: NCT01325519
• Lead Sponsor: Massachusetts General Hospital

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the decision making of hospitalized subjects having a verbal discussion about CPR compared to subjects using a video.

Detailed Description

A.1. Aim 1: To recruit 150 subjects admitted to the inpatient general medicine ward with an overall prognosis of one year or less and randomly assign these subjects to: 1. a video visually depicting CPR preferences or 2. the current standard of care without the use of video (control).

Hypothesis 1: It is feasible to recruit and randomize 150 hospitalized subjects with an overall prognosis of one year or less.

A.2. Aim 2: To compare the care preferences for CPR and intubation among subjects randomized to video and subjects randomized to the current standard of care without the video.

Hypothesis 2: Subjects randomized to the video intervention will be significantly more likely to opt against CPR and intubation compared to those who do not see the video.

A.3. Aim 3: To compare code-status documentation in the electronic medical records between subjects randomized to the video and those who are receiving the current standard of care without the video.

Hypothesis 3: Subjects randomized to the video are more likely to have their code-status documented in the electronic medical records compared to those who do not see the video.

A.4. Aim 4: To compare the decisional conflict of subjects randomized to video and subjects randomized to the current standard of care without the video.

Hypothesis 4: When compared to subjects randomized to the current standard of care, subjects in the video intervention group will have lower decisional conflict (lower decisional conflict scores) when asked to choose CPR and intubation preferences.

A.5. Aim 5: To compare knowledge assessment of CPR of subjects randomized to video and subjects randomized to current standard of care without the video.

Hypothesis 5: When compared to subjects randomized to the current standard of care, subjects in the video intervention group will have higher knowledge assessment scores when asked questions regarding their understanding of CPR.

A.6. Aim 6: To compare code-status (CPR, and intubation) preferences in the electronic medical record on future hospitalizations up to one year post-hospital discharge of subjects randomized to video and subjects randomized to current standard of care without the video.

Hypothesis 6: Subjects randomized to the video are more likely to opt against CPR and intubation in the future compared to those who do not see the video.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2011-03
• Study First Submitted: 2011-03-28
• Study First Submitted QC: 2011-03-28
• Study First Posted: 2011-03-29
• Primary Completion: 2012-03
• Status Verified: 2020-11
• Last Update Submitted: 2020-11-16
• Last Update Posted: 2020-11-17

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: UNKNOWN
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 150

Inclusion Criteria

Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: SINGLE_GROUP

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
experimental intervention group	video decision aid	video decision aid viewed by subjects

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
preferences for medical care	within 48 hours of admission to the hospital	preference for CPR

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
code status on subsequent admissions	subsequent hospital admissions
knowledge of CPR	baseline and post-intervention

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

MGH; 🇺🇸 Boston, Massachusetts, United States