Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
79 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2022-11-11
2025-01-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Identifying Early Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Using Health Administrative Data
NCT04966637
Interstitial Lung Disease Questionnaire
NCT01711151
A Study to Characterize the Disease Behavior of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) and Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) During the Peri-Diagnostic Period
NCT03261037
Creation of a Biospecimen Repository From Patients With Interstitial Lung Diseases (ILD)
NCT03478826
Oxygen Therapy Use in Patients With Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease
NCT05957198
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Dyspnea is a subjective and complex symptom where experience is shaped by a variety of factors, including physiological, psychological, and environmental influences. Degree of lung function impairment does not consistently predict level of breathlessness and cannot be used as a surrogate for direct dyspnea measures. Unfortunately, dyspnea is not frequently assessed in care. Many scales exist including uni- and multidimensional scales. MRC, a unidimensional scale, is the most commonly used dyspnea scale. The MRC scale assesses dyspnea by asking which activities, ranging from vigorous exercise to minimal activities of daily living, are limited by dyspnea. The MRC scale has shown good utility in many studies. A major drawback of the MRC scale in some populations is the lack of a scale point for patients who experience dyspnea at rest, but it is easy to extend the scale to ask about dyspnea at rest. However, scales such as the MRC are indirect; they do not actually ask the patient how much dyspnea they experience. Experts have therefore recommended that patients not only be routinely asked about dyspnea but should also be asked to rate its severity. In a recent study of over 67000 patients, dyspnea severity reported by patients during a rapid nursing assessment on admission was associated with two-fold odds of death in 2 years. The authors noted that patients who reported any dyspnea were at an increased risk of death during that hospital stay, the greater the dyspnea severity, the greater the risk of death. Even after adjustment for patient comorbidities, demographics, and severity of illness, increasing dyspnea severity remained associated with inpatient mortality. They suggest that routine assessment of dyspnea severity may allow for better monitoring and optimal interventions that could potentially reduce mortality and morbidity. A 2015 survey of US-based hospitalists also suggests that dyspnea severity may help guide management. Unfortunately, routine dyspnea severity assessment is also uncommon in practice.
Secondly there are no dyspnea treatment algorithms for clinicians to implement in practice. The American Thoracic Society (ATS) statements and guidelines emphasize the urgent need to assess and manage dyspnea in respiratory disease, including IPF but do not provide a treatment algorithm. They do recommend evidence-based therapies such as pulmonary rehabilitation, anxiolytics and opioids and the treatment of associated psychosocial factors. And finally, physician perspectives regarding dyspnea and reluctance to use opiates, inadequate education and lack of training are all important barriers to effective dyspnea management.
To address this care gap in assessment, investigator developed an easy-to-use scale, Edmonton Dyspnea Inventory (EDI) in the Multidisciplinary Collaborative ILD Clinic, Edmonton, Canada. EDI is a pilot tool to assess dyspnea severity at rest, during activities of daily living and self-reported exercise. In addition, the tool also documents crisis dyspnea episodes and their triggers to guide management. Investigator's preliminary work showed that EDI has good internal consistency, strong correlation with MRC and weak correlation with lung function data. Group based trajectory modelling showed 3 different groups of dyspnea intensity with implications for survival. Investigator also showed feasibility of outpatient clinical use over 10 years. In addition, EDI use led to early institution of dyspnea therapies (van Den Bosch AJHPC 2023). This tool facilitated early and personalized dyspnea management that differs both between and within individual MRC grades (Kalluri. AJHPC 2024). Investigator has also shown this approach to dyspnea assessment and management facilitates patient self-management and mastery, allowing reduction in acute care utilization and healthcare costs in IPF. This is the only tool to that facilitates both assessment and management of dyspnea. Systematic assessment and appropriate dyspnea management is an urgent unmet need in patient care. Physicians and clinicians require an easy-to-use tool to assess dyspnea and create a personalized management plan for their patients. Investigator believes EDI can serve both purposes as per our early studies. Investigator proposes to examine EDI's cross-sectional and longitudinal validity and reliability for use in IPF and F-ILD including PPF. Investigator will also explore patient and care provider perceptions on the use of EDI and its potential/actual impact on clinical care using focus group methodology. Investigator will recruit participants from all three sites for qualitative analysis.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
All Participants
Participants include IPF and F-ILD including progressive pulmonary fibrosis phenotype
Breathlessness Assessment Tool
Participants will complete a breathlessness assessment tool (questionnaire) at three timepoints over the study duration, among other validated questionnaires.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Breathlessness Assessment Tool
Participants will complete a breathlessness assessment tool (questionnaire) at three timepoints over the study duration, among other validated questionnaires.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* All adult patients with the condition of interest will be recruited regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, stage of disease to enable broad inclusion.
* As IPF is male dominant disease with most cases presenting late, we need to ensure that females and milder dyspnea grades (MRC 1-2) are also represented in the sample. Dyspnea perception is expected to be higher in females. To ensure representative sampling, we will use a sampling frame at 50% enrolment (50 patients) to ensure at least 25% females and smaller dyspnea grade are included at that point. If not, recruitment will be modified to achieve this.
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Alberta
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Kaye Edmonton Clinic
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Aarhus University
Aarhus, , Denmark
Bristol ILD Service; North Bristol NHS Trust
Bristol, , United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Pro00119668
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.