Comprehensive Care Community and Culture Study

NCT ID: NCT04489693

Last Updated: 2025-04-09

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

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

3000 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-03-06

Study Completion Date

2029-07-31

Brief Summary

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

This randomized trial is evaluating whether socioeconomically disadvantaged Medicare patients at increased risk of hospitalization experience fewer hospitalization if those patients are offered care in: 1) ACCT, where patients receive care from different physicians in the hospital and the clinic settings and have access to nurse and social worker care coordination services, 2) CCP where patients receive care from one physician in the inpatient and outpatient settings or 3) C4P which adds screening of unmet social needs, community health worker support and arts and culture programming to CCP. The study will determine how these programs affect patient activation and engagement in care, satisfaction with care, general health and mental health, and goal attainment.

Detailed Description

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

Health disparities and the health of communities are influenced both by the health care system and by the social context in which people live. Accordingly, interventions that seek to meaningfully reduce disparities should consider patients' medical and social needs. The fragmentation of medical care is one aspect of the health care system that adversely affects health, perhaps particularly for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals with more limited resources to bridge gaps in care. Indeed, while many care coordination programs have been developed, evidence supporting their effectiveness is quite limited and especially for vulnerable populations. This study will fill important gaps in evidence concerning the effects of 3 diverse care coordination models on hospitalization rates for a socioeconomically disadvantaged population at increased risk of hospitalization that is served by the University of Chicago Medicine (UCM). Secondary outcomes include patient activation and engagement with care, satisfaction with care, general health and mental health and personal goal attainment.

The first model is an example of a commonly implemented class of care coordination models that relies primarily on the use of care coordinators. The specific care coordinator (CC) model that is being studied - the Partners HealthCare Care Management Program (PHCMP) - was initially developed and studied by Partners HealthCare. In PHCMP, "high-risk" patients (defined primarily as ≥2 hospitalizations in the year before enrollment) have access to nurse care coordinators who seek to help manage the patient's care across the continuum. UCM's Medicare Shared Savings Plan Accountable Care Organization has recently implemented a model based on PHCMP that it calls the Ambulatory Care Coordination Team (ACCT). In ACCT, nurses and social workers provide proactive care coordination to "high-risk" patients. CC and ACCT are representative of common care coordination models implemented nationally. The fact that these models typically involve hiring additional staff and increase the number of hand-offs may explain why programs such as these have often failed to produce desired improvements in health outcomes or decreases in utilization.

The second model is a novel care delivery program called the Comprehensive Care Physician (CCP) program. The CCP model seeks to more effectively integrate inpatient and outpatient care for patients at increased risk of hospitalization by offering them care from the same physician in the inpatient and the outpatient settings so that these patients can benefit from the advantages of continuity in the doctor patient relationship. Since 2012, the investigators have developed and tested this model at UCM in a randomized trial funded by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation comparing CCP to standard care (SC) in which patients receive inpatient and outpatient care from different doctors and do not have access to care coordinators. The investigators enrolled 2,000 patients in this study, of whom \~90% are African American, with a median income of \~$20,000 per year and 1-year mortality rate of 15-20%. The results are striking: care ratings on Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) measures correspond to the 95th percentile nationally for CCP patients vs. the 80th for SC, about 30% of CCP patients have a 1 point improvement in self-rated mental health status (e.g., from good to very good) compared to SC patients, hospitalizations are 20% lower over 1 year follow-up and 26% lower for CCP patients who experienced ≥2 hospitalizations in the year before enrollment. We think the efficacy of this model comes from the deep connection that the CCP team develops with patients, understanding thise patients as individuals and recognizing and beginning to address the deeper social determinants of their health.

The third model, the Comprehensive Care, Community and Culture Program (C4P), builds on the CCP program to better engage patients in their care. C4P was motivated by the finding that \~30% of patients who enrolled in the CCP program did not engage with it despite having expressed interest in the program and that a wide range of social factors might be barriers to their engagement. To better address social determinants of health, C4P builds on CCP by adding 1) systematic screening of 17 domains of unmet social needs, 2) access to a community health worker and 3) access to community-based arts and culture programming. Preliminary findings from a pilot of C4P indicate that unmet social needs are diverse, highly concentrated in a small number of patients and linked to each other, presenting barriers to addressing these needs. However, unmet needs were also found to cluster in ways that suggested actionable strategies to address needs more effectively. Early results suggest that C4P increases patient activation and engagement in care compared to CCP and SC.

While we have rigorously compared CCP to SC and performed a pilot study of C4P, CCP and SC at UCM, we have not compared CCP or C4P to the more commonly-used CC model, nor have we performed an adequately powered study comparing CCP and C4P. The rigorous findings comparing these models that we will generate are sorely needed by patients and health systems to inform choices about care coordination models, and particularly for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals.

This study has 2 specific aims:

Aim 1: To compare the effect of 3 models of care on hospitalization (primary outcome) and patient activation, engagement in care, satisfaction, health outcomes and goal attainment over 1 year for patients at increased risk of hospitalization: 1) a care coordinator (CC) model in which patients receive inpatient and outpatient care from different physicians with access to care coordinator services for patients identified as at high risk of hospitalization, 2) the Comprehensive Care Physician (CCP) program in which patients at increased risk of hospitalization can receive inpatient and outpatient care from the same physician and 3) the Comprehensive Care, Community and Culture Program(C4P), which enhances CCP care with systematic screening for unmet social needs, access to a community health worker and access to programming to better engage patients and address their unmet social needs.

Aim 2: To determine whether the effects of the 3 models differ based on the number of hospitalizations that a patient has experienced in the year before entering these models of care.

Study Description: This study is a randomized clinical trial that compares 3 approaches to care for patients at increased risk of hospitalization: 1) ACCT in which patients receive inpatient and outpatient care from different doctors with the option to receive care from UCM physicians and care coordination from nurses and social workers who manage their care with the larger clinical team, 2) CCP in which patients receive care from the same UCM physician in the inpatient and outpatient settings and 3) C4P in which patients receive care from a CCP in addition to systematic screening of unmet social needs and access to a community health worker and community based arts and culture programming. Patients are insured by Medicare or Medicare and Medicaid, be at increased risk of hospitalization based on a history of prior hospitalization or emergency department use and be recruited from mixed, but predominantly low-income communities on Chicago's South Side. A total of 3,000 patients will be recruited, with 1,000 patients in the ACCT, CCP and C4P arms. The primary outcome is hospitalization because of its importance to both patients and health systems. Our primary measure of hospitalization is the number of hospitalizations over 1 year measured in Medicare claims data. Other outcomes are patient activation and engagement in care (measured using the Patient Activation Measure and the rate of completion of primary care visits), satisfaction with care (measured using HCAHPS scores), self-rated general and mental health status, and goal attainment.

Conditions

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

Comprehensive Care Quality of Care Medicare Cost of Care

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

This Compares the CCP ,C4P and Traditional Care Coordination Models
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.

Ambulatory Care Coordinator Team (ACCT)

Patients randomized to ACCT receive care from different doctors in clinic and in the hospital. ACCT patients who have been hospitalized twice, had 4 emergency department (ED) visits in the last year or are referred by their primary care physician are offered ACCT care coordination services (ACCT-CC) from nurses and social workers who manage their care with the larger clinical team. Patients are graduated from ACCT if the ACCT team thinks they are no longer high risk.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Ambulatory Care Coordinator Team (ACCT)

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

See arm description

Comprehensive Care Physician (CCP)

Patients randomized to the CCP group are assigned to a Comprehensive Care Physician and are asked to see their assigned CCP for their primary care. The patients receive their care from the same CCP in the outpatient clinic and also if they were to be hospitalized.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Comprehensive Care Physician Program (CCP)

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

see arm description

Comprehensive Care, Community & Culture Program (C4P)

Patients randomized to C4P receive care from a CCP in both the hospital and the clinic as well as the following: 1) systematic screening of 17 domains of unmet social needs, 2) access to a community health worker and 3) access to community-based arts and culture programming.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Comprehensive Care Community & Culture Program (C4P)

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

see arm description

Interventions

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

Ambulatory Care Coordinator Team (ACCT)

See arm description

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Comprehensive Care Physician Program (CCP)

see arm description

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Comprehensive Care Community & Culture Program (C4P)

see arm description

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Must have Medicare Part A and Part B
* Must have been hospitalized once in the past 2 years or be in emergency department at time recruitment is initiated

Exclusion Criteria

\- None
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Chicago

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

Locations

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

David Meltzer

Chicago, Illinois, United States

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

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

United States

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

David Meltzer, MD, PhD

Role: primary

773-702-0836

Emily Perish, MPP

Role: backup

773-702-3726 ext. Meltzer

References

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

Gier NM, Maurer RR, Tang JW. Clinician experiences in a DBT-informed consultation group embedded within a US academic primary care clinic: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2025 Oct 27;15(10):e100967. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-100967.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 41145263 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

IRB-16-0391

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Impact of Outreach on Medicaid Enrollment
NCT05433454 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA