The Effectiveness of Peer-to-Peer Community Support to Promote Aging in Place

Not Applicable

Completed

Conditions: Hospitalization
Emergency Room
Wellness Programs

Interventions: Behavioral: Standard Community Services
Behavioral: Peer-to-Peer Support

Registration Number: NCT02308696

Lead Sponsor: University of Wisconsin, Madison

Brief Summary: The investigators' overall objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of peer-to-peer support programs in preventing the necessity of acute health care and nursing home services for older adult populations and in promoting their health and wellness. The investigators' Specific Aims are:

1. To compare the effectiveness of peer-to-peer community support in preventing hospitalization, emergency department (ED) use, and nursing home placement in an at-risk older adult population relative to standard community services.

2. To compare the effect of peer-to-peer community support on intermediary measures of health and wellness such as self-rated health, depression, and anxiety relative to standard community services.

Detailed Description: The investigators will accomplish the aims by conducting a longitudinal comparative-effectiveness study in which at-risk older adult study participants in three communities across the US are followed for 12-months. Using a quasi-experimental design, investigators will compare outcomes in those receiving peer-to-peer community support to those receiving standard community services.

At all three sites investigators will include 120 older adults in the peer-to-peer support group and 120 in the standard community services group for a total intervention group size of 360 (120 from each site) and 360 in the control group (120 from each site).

Study Outcomes \& Measures To meet the first two aims investigators will (1) compare annualized rates of hospitalization, ED use, and nursing home placement and (2) examine the changes in self-reported health, depression, anxiety, and other measures of well-being in the group receiving peer-to-peer support compared to the group receiving standard community services from baseline to the end of study enrolment. The investigators describe each of our outcomes and additional study measures in detail below. Measures have been translated and used in Spanish and have been shown to be valid or have high reliability in Spanish

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status: COMPLETED

Sex: All

Target Recruitment: 456

Inclusion Criteria

Overall
- ≥65 years of age
- Speaks English or Spanish
- Lives independently in their community year-round
- Meet the community defined criterion for receiving peer-to-peer support (at least one of the following)
  - Low income (at or below poverty level)
  - On a fixed income that barely meets their living expenses
  - Social and/or familial isolation
  - Chronic Illness
  - In need of frequent community services or resources. Peer-to-peer support group (must meet the overall inclusion criteria as well as the following)
- Enrolled in the peer-to-peer support program and have an assigned peer volunteer

Exclusion Criteria

< 65
Score ≤ 30 on the Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status (TICS) because they will not have the ability to complete the survey
State that it is unlikely that they will receive peer-to-peer support services for at least a year. Individuals who are unlikely to receive at least a year of services include those who need short-term help after a surgery and are likely to return to full functioning and those planning to transition to nursing home care or move away.
- Currently receiving hospice services

Study & Design

Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL

Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Standard Services (non-randomized)	Standard Community Services	225 older adults will continue receiving standard community services
Peer-to-peer support (non-randomized)	Peer-to-Peer Support	225 older adults that are currently receiving peer-to-peer support

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Number of Hospitalizations, Emergency Department Visits, and Urgent Care Visits	1 year	Investigators will ask participants to report their hospitalizations, ED and Urgent Care visits over the course of a 1 year follow up

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Social Support as Assessed by the 8-item Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey	1 year	Investigators will use the 8-item medical outcomes study social support survey to measure social support. Scored from 1-5, and a score of 1 indicates lower levels of social support while a score of 5 indicates higher levels of social support.
Depressive Symptoms as Assessed by the 10 Item Version of the Center of Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale	1 year	Investigators will use the 10 item version of the Center of Epidemiologic Studies-Depression scale to assess depressive symptoms. The possible range of scores is 0 to 10, with a score of zero indicating no depressive symptoms and a score of 10 indicating the most depressive symptoms
Medical Conditions as Assessed by the Medical Conditions Questionnaire (MCQ)	1 year	Medical Conditions Questionnaire has 9 yes/no questions on whether or not participants have ever had a condition like heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc. It ranges from 0 to 9, with 0 indicating better overall health and 9 indicating poor overall health.
Health Status and Quality of Life as Assessed by the Short Form-12 Question Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) and the Short Form-12 Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS).	1 year	Investigators will use the Short Form-12 question Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) and the Short Form-12 Mental component Summary (SF-12 MCS) to measure physical and mental health status. Summary scores range from 0-100, with higher scores indicating a better self-reported level of health.
Anxiety Symptoms as Assessed by the 5-item Version of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory Short Form	1 year	Investigators will use the 5-item version of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory Short Form to measure anxiety symptoms. The scale is 0 to 5, with 0 points indicating zero anxiety symptoms and 5 indicating the most anxiety symptoms.
Loneliness as Assessed by the Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in a Large Survey	1 year	Investigators will use the Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in a large survey. Three item measure with a three-point response scale from 1-3, with a score of 1 indicating the least loneliness and a score of 3 indicating the most loneliness.
Self-Efficacy as Assessed by the General Self-efficacy Scale to Measure an Individual's Sense of Perceived Self-efficacy.	1 year	Investigators will use the General Self-efficacy Scale to measure an individual's sense of perceived self-efficacy. The total score ranges between 1 and 4, with 1 indicating low self-efficacy and 4 indicating high self-efficacy.
Resilience as Assessed by the Brief Resilience Scale	1 year	Investigators will use the Brief Resilience Scale to measure the ability of individuals to bounce back from stress. Six item scale scored from 1-5, with a score of 1 indicating low resilience and a score of 5 indicating high resilience.
Physical Health as Assessed by the NAGI Test	1 year	The NAGI test is a nine-item instrument scored from 1-5, with higher scores indicating less physical health.
Mobility Disability as Assessed by the Rosow-Breslow Scale	1 year	The Rosow-Breslow scale is a composite measure of mobility disability. The composite score ranges from 0 to 3 with higher scores indicating greater disability.

Trial Locations

Locations (5): Jewish Family Service
🇺🇸
Los Angeles, California, United States
Alpert Jewish Family and Children's Service
🇺🇸
West Palm Beach, Florida, United States
Community Place of Greater Rochester
🇺🇸
Rochester, New York, United States
University of Wisconsin
🇺🇸
Madison, Wisconsin, United States
Aliance For Children and Families
🇺🇸
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States