Impact of an Enhanced Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) Strategy on PROM Completion Rates

NCT ID: NCT06078137

Last Updated: 2025-07-31

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

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

200 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-09-01

Study Completion Date

2025-12-01

Brief Summary

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

in clinical practice has been curbed by issues related to the variability in use of these tools for decision-making, and universally poor completion rates over time. Patients may not see the relevance of responding to questions about their health, and the results may not be reviewed by the clinician or presented and visualized with the patient. The questions may seem impersonal (e.g. too general and not directly assessing their individual goals, motivations, aspirations), irrelevant (e.g., asking about symptoms of depression when a person is seeking musculoskeletal specialty care) and insensitive (e.g., asking about sensitive subjects at the outset thereby disengaging the individual), and redundant or awkward (e.g., presenting questions that seem very similar or administered in strange orders). Finally, PROMs may also confer some burden (e.g., long PROM questionnaires often used for research may be unnecessarily burdensome for patient care), and provide logistical challenges (e.g., difficulties in administering the tools at the right time points), adding to a poor patient experience.

Detailed Description

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

The investigator sought to assess the impact of an enhanced and more personalized PROM strategy to overcome these barriers by providing i) a primer ahead of PROMs administration, ii) simple 3-part survey capturing capability, comfort, and calm, iii) a short distress and misconception survey, iv) goal setting question, v) summary sheet of PRO scores, and vi) a commitment intervention. Patients will subsequently be requested to complete the CollaboRATE survey, JSPPE survey, and questions about their experience in relation to the new format of surveys (only if they were in the intervention group) before receiving a text message reminder around 6-weeks followed by a set of deprioritization questions and the 3-part capability, comfort, and calm survey.

Conditions

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

PROM

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

BASIC_SCIENCE

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Study Groups

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

Intervention Group

Patients randomized to intervention receive both usual Patient reported outcome measure (PROM) and new PROMs strategy (on the technology platform for English speakers and on REDCap/Qualtrix for Spanish Speakers) done after rooming.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy

Intervention Type OTHER

Patients randomized to intervention receive both usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy

Control group

Patients go through the registration process which includes PROMs completion using Ipads. Enrolled in the room at the end of the visit.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

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

Usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy

Patients randomized to intervention receive both usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

All new patients English and Spanish speakers

Exclusion Criteria

Cognitive deficiency precluding PROM completion Language other than English or Spanish
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

89 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

University of Texas at Austin

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

David Ring

Professor of Surgery and Perioperative Care Department

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

David Ring, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Professor of orthopedic surgery at The university of Texas at Austin

Locations

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

University of Texas Health Austin

Austin, Texas, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

Other Identifiers

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

STUDY00001696

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Telemonitoring Versus Usual Care
NCT01056640 COMPLETED PHASE2/PHASE3
Hospital to Home Outcomes
NCT02081846 COMPLETED NA