SimCare: Physician Intervention to Improve Diabetes Care

NCT ID: NCT00262704

Last Updated: 2014-08-21

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

2020 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2001-12-31

Study Completion Date

2002-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This randomized trial will test the hypotheses that (a) a physician opinion leader intervention, (b) a "narrative process trace" physician feedback intervention, or (c) the combined intervention (a + b), are no more effective than (d) usual care in improving the clinical care of adult patients with type 2 diabetes.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This randomized trial will test the hypothesis that (a) an influential physician feedback intervention, (b) a "narrative process trace" feedback intervention, or (c) the combined intervention (a + b), are no more effective than (d) usual care in improving the clinical care of adult patients with diabetes mellitus.

The unit of randomization and the unit of analysis will be primary care physicians who have more than 10 adult patients with diabetes mellitus. The 162 physicians eligible for this study provide care to about 6,804 adults with diagnosed diabetes at 24 primary care clinics. The narrative process trace intervention uses automated medical record (AMR)-mounted clinical cases to assess physicians' diabetes care decisions, with results provided as feedback to physicians. The influential physician feedback intervention emphasizes individualized education of physicians, which will be guided by the narrative process trace in the combined intervention group. Usual care includes the use of a diabetes clinical guideline, use of a diabetes patient registry that provides key clinical data for each adult patient with diabetes, and access to clinic-based diabetes education nurses. We have shown in previous controlled studies that the guideline, diabetes registry, and clinic-based diabetes education nurses have failed to significantly improve diabetes care on a population basis, thus justifying the additional, stronger interventions that now will be tested.

Dependent variables include glycemic control and cardiovascular risk reduction of all 3,360 patients cared for by the 80 study physicians. Secondary analysis will assess rates of screening for microvascular complications. Physicians will be randomized in blocks based on specialty, number of diabetes patients, and years of practice experience. Hierarchical data analysis will be used to accommodate the nested data and propensity scores will be used to correct for selection effects and missing data. Results of this experiment will advance our theoretical understanding of physician behavior change and quantify cost and impact of three specific intervention strategies to improve chronic disease care in the primary care setting. The study will have substantial impact on clinical practice and policy whether the results are positive or negative. If successful, the interventions will be easily disseminated to other primary care practice settings.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Diabetes Mellitus

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

FACTORIAL

Primary Study Purpose

HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Group A

Control group

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Group B

Simulated case-based customized learning

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Simulated case-based customized learning

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Formal Analysis of Diabetes Practice Style, Using SimCare cases with Process Trace Feedback

Group C

Simulated case based customized learning + leader feedback

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Simulated case based customized learning + leader feedback

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Formal Analysis of Diabetes Practice Style, Using SimCare cases with Process Trace Feedback + Physician Opinion Leader Feedback Tailored to Provider's Specific Practice Style

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Simulated case-based customized learning

Formal Analysis of Diabetes Practice Style, Using SimCare cases with Process Trace Feedback

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Simulated case based customized learning + leader feedback

Formal Analysis of Diabetes Practice Style, Using SimCare cases with Process Trace Feedback + Physician Opinion Leader Feedback Tailored to Provider's Specific Practice Style

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients- Diabetes patients associated with the n=57 physicians were selected according to the following criteria: (1) enrolled in HealthPartners on January 1, 1998, (2) be at least 19 years of age on January 1, 1998, (3) have an established diagnosis of diabetes mellitus in 1998 based on meeting at least one of the following two criteria: (a) have one or more inpatient, or two or more outpatient International Classification of Diseases-9 (ICD-9) diagnostic codes 250.xx for diabetes, or (b) have a filled prescription for a diabetes-specific drug including insulins, sulphonylureas, biguanides, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, or meglitinides.
* Physicians-All primary care adult care physicians (family physicians or primary care internists) employed full-time at HealthPartners medical groups as of 2000 were eligible for this study.

Exclusion Criteria

* None
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

FED

Sponsor Role collaborator

HealthPartners Institute

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Patrick J O'Connor, MD MPH

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

HealthPartners Institute

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

HealthPartners Research Foundation

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

O'Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Johnson PE, Rush WA, Biltz G. Clinical Inertia and Outpatient Medical Errors. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 2: Concepts and Methodology). Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005 Feb. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20513/

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21249838 (View on PubMed)

Dutta P, Biltz GR, Johnson PE, Sperl-Hillen JM, Rush WA, Duncan JE, O'Connor PJ. SimCare: A Simulation Model to Investigate Physician Decision-Making in the Care of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. In K. Henriksen, J. Battles, D. Lewin, and E. Marks. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation. Rockville, MD. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). 2005; Vol.4: Programs, Tools, and Products; 179-192. <http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/advances/>

Reference Type BACKGROUND

O'Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Johnson PE, Rush WA. Identification, Classification, and Frequency of Medical Errors in Outpatient Diabetes Care. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 1: Research Findings). Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005 Feb. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20464/

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21249801 (View on PubMed)

O'Connor PJ. Overcome clinical inertia to control systolic blood pressure. Arch Intern Med. 2003 Dec 8-22;163(22):2677-8. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.22.2677. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14662620 (View on PubMed)

O'Connor PJ. Setting evidence-based priorities for diabetes care improvement. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003 Aug;15(4):283-5. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzg062. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12930043 (View on PubMed)

Johnson PE, Veazie PJ, Kochevar L, O'Connor PJ, Potthoff SJ, Verma D, Dutta P. Understanding variation in chronic disease outcomes. Health Care Manag Sci. 2002 Aug;5(3):175-89. doi: 10.1023/a:1019740401536.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12363045 (View on PubMed)

O'Connor PJ. Patient archetypes, physician archetypes, and tailored diabetes care. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2002 Jul-Aug;15(4):334-7. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12150470 (View on PubMed)

O'Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Johnson PE, Rush WA, Asche SE, Dutta P, Biltz GR. Simulated physician learning intervention to improve safety and quality of diabetes care: a randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2009 Apr;32(4):585-90. doi: 10.2337/dc08-0944. Epub 2009 Jan 26.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19171723 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

R01HS010639

Identifier Type: AHRQ

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

0001600

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Proactive Diabetes Case Management
NCT00013208 COMPLETED NA
NYULMC CareSmarts Pilot
NCT02726217 COMPLETED NA
Michigan Men's Diabetes Project 2
NCT05370781 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA