Trial Outcomes & Findings for ENgaging in Advance Care Planning Talks Group Visit Intervention for Cognitive Impairment (NCT NCT03711396)

NCT ID: NCT03711396

Last Updated: 2021-11-22

Results Overview

The Advance Care Planning (ACP) Engagement Scale will be used to assess readiness to engage in specific parts of the advance care planning process (i.e. signing official papers to name a medical decision maker; talking to the decision maker; talking to the doctor; signing official papers putting their wishes in writing). Items are rated on a Likert scale, with possible scores ranging from 1-5. Higher scores indicate a higher level of engagement with the advance care planning behavior and a better outcome.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

26 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

0, 3 months

Results posted on

2021-11-22

Participant Flow

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - aMCI
Participants with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) will attend group visits to discuss advance care planning with their study partners. Group visits will last up to two hours and be held up to twice.
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Care Partners
Participants who are the care partners of persons with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) will attend group visits (with the person with aMCI) to discuss advance care planning with their study partners. Group visits will last up to two hours and be held up to twice.
Overall Study
STARTED
13
13
Overall Study
COMPLETED
13
13
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
0
0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

ENgaging in Advance Care Planning Talks Group Visit Intervention for Cognitive Impairment

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Intervention
n=13 Participants
Participants attended two group visits one month apart to discuss advance care planning and to receive information about advance care planning.
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
13 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Continuous
78.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.8 • n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
3 Participants
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
12 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
13 Participants
n=5 Participants
Education
High School Graduate
3 Participants
n=5 Participants
Education
Some College
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Education
College Graduate
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
Education
Any Post-graduate
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship status
Married/with partner
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship status
Widowed
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship status
Divorced/separated
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
Caregiver in the last 12 months
Yes
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
Caregiver in the last 12 months
No
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
Self-Rated Health
Excellent
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
Self-Rated Health
Good
3 Participants
n=5 Participants
Self-Rated Health
Fair
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
Self-Rated Health
Poor
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Self-Rated Health
Very Poor
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship of Study Partner to Participant
Spouse
9 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship of Study Partner to Participant
Partner
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Relationship of Study Partner to Participant
Child
3 Participants
n=5 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: 0, 3 months

Population: Participants with aMCI

The Advance Care Planning (ACP) Engagement Scale will be used to assess readiness to engage in specific parts of the advance care planning process (i.e. signing official papers to name a medical decision maker; talking to the decision maker; talking to the doctor; signing official papers putting their wishes in writing). Items are rated on a Likert scale, with possible scores ranging from 1-5. Higher scores indicate a higher level of engagement with the advance care planning behavior and a better outcome.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Persons With aMCI
n=13 Participants
Participants with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment will attend group visits to discuss advance care planning with their study partners. Group visits will last up to two hours and be help up to twice.
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Care Partners
Care partners of persons with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment who participated in the advance care planning group visits.
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to sign official papers naming a medical decision maker at 0 months
1.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.12
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to talk to decision maker at 0 months
1.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to talk to doctor at 0 months
2.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.36
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to sign papers putting wishes into writing at 0 months
2.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.15
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to sign official papers naming a medical decision maker at 3 months
1.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.93
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to talk to decision maker at 3 months
2.38 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.96
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to talk to doctor at 3 months
2.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.91
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Scale)
Readiness to sign papers putting wishes into writing at 3 months
2.08 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.16

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: 0, 3 months

Population: Care partners of persons with aMCI

Care partner report of the Advance Care Planning (ACP) Engagement Scale will be used to assess care partner perspectives on the person with amnestic mild cognitive impairment's readiness to engage in specific parts of the advance care planning process (i.e. signing official papers to name a medical decision maker; talking to the decision maker; talking to the doctor; signing official papers putting their wishes in writing). Items are rated on a Likert scale, with possible scores ranging from 1-5. Higher scores indicate a higher level of engagement with the advance care planning behavior and a better outcome.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Persons With aMCI
n=13 Participants
Participants with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment will attend group visits to discuss advance care planning with their study partners. Group visits will last up to two hours and be help up to twice.
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Care Partners
Care partners of persons with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment who participated in the advance care planning group visits.
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to sign official papers naming a medical decision maker at 0 months
1.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.19
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to talk to decision maker at 0 months
2.31 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.25
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to talk to doctor at 0 months
2.62 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.96
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to sign papers putting wishes into writing at 0 months
1.62 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.77
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to sign official papers naming a medical decision maker at 3 months
1.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.11
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to talk to decision maker at 3 months
2.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to talk to doctor at 3 months
1.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation .93
Change in Readiness to Engage in ACP (ACP Engagement Score) - Care Partner Reported
Readiness to sign papers putting wishes into writing at 3 months
1.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.95

OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome

Timeframe: Following Session Participation, 15 minutes after completed

Population: Combined persons with aMCI and care partners groups

Investigator-developed 7-item evaluation to assess participant rating of intervention comfort in the group setting, usefulness, preference compared to one-on-one visits, and helpfulness of talking with others. Each item is rated from "strong disagree" to "strongly agree" on a 5-point Likert scale. Scores can range from 1-5 with a score of 5 being a better outcome. This scale has not been specifically named. It has been published in the included reference.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Persons With aMCI
n=13 Participants
Participants with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment will attend group visits to discuss advance care planning with their study partners. Group visits will last up to two hours and be help up to twice.
Advance Care Planning Group Visits - Care Partners
n=13 Participants
Care partners of persons with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment who participated in the advance care planning group visits.
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
Group setting is better for ACP discussion than normal doctor visit
4.23 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.09
4.69 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.48
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
The group discussion gave me useful information
4.62 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.51
5.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.00
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
I felt comfortable talking about ACP in the group setting
4.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.66
4.92 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.28
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
Talking with other people about ACP was helpful
4.23 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.36
5.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.00
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
I feel the group visit addressed my specific questions
4.31 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.75
4.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.66
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
I feel able to discuss ACP with my regular healthcare provider
4.62 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.51
4.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.65
Advance Care Planning Intervention Evaluation
I would recommend these group visit sessions to a friend
4.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.45
4.92 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.28

Adverse Events

Advance Care Planning Group Visits

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Additional Information

Dr. Hillary D. Lum

University of Colorado School of Medicine

Phone: 303-724-1911

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place