A Clinical Decision Support Tool for Assessing the Ability to Decide on Returning Home in Elderly Patients with Cognitive Impairments
NCT ID: NCT06669559
Last Updated: 2024-11-01
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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
238 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-01-31
2026-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
the aim of the study is to add to the clinical decision a decision support tool to assess the capacity to decide whether to return home has better sensitivity in the assessment of the capacity to decide than that of clinical assessment alone
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Spatial and Ocular Trajectories for the Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease.
NCT06213766
DC Longitudinal Study on Aging and Specimen Bank
NCT03702907
Test and Usability of Mixed-reality Screening Tool for Early Detection of Cognitive Declines
NCT05403814
Aging Stereotypes and Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease
NCT03138018
Detecting Dementia Earlier
NCT03900936
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Evaluating the capacity of elderly patients to decide on their own return home is a daily concern for geriatricians. Indeed, patients with neurocognitive disorders are often forced to be institutionalized without anyone being certain of their inability to decide. 43% of people hospitalized for a short geriatric stay have a neurocognitive disorder linked to Alzheimer's disease. Despite these disorders, it is absolutely necessary to respect the fundamental ethical principles of medical practice and thus the autonomy of the patient. The legal capacity and choice of place of life by the person with or without a disability are protected by international institutions (United Nations (UN), Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, article 19) and regulated by law, even for patients under legal protection. Neurocognitive disorders do not necessarily mean an inability to decide and the MMSE, the reference scale for screening neurocognitive disorders, is not sufficient to determine decision-making capacity apart from extreme scores. Depending on the stage or type of neurocognitive disorders, the same stages of the decision-making process (understanding, reasoning, appreciation, choice) are not impacted.
The ability to decide depends on the type of decision (deciding to vote, deciding to take medication, participating in clinical research, etc.) or domain-dependent. Currently, the assessment of the ability to decide to return home is carried out by clinicians according to clinical assessment without a specific standardized tool. The variability between evaluators turns out to be very important, specifically identified in the process of being able to decide to take a treatment. Associating the clinician's clinical decision with a standardized tool for evaluating patients' capacity to decide allows for more ethical clinical practice.
No validated and generalized tool for assessing the patient's ability to decide whether to return home after hospitalization exists.
Following this observation, the DROM-test tool (DReam of hOMe), developed within the neuro-psychogeriatrics department of Bretonneau Hospital (102 patients, average age 83 years, average MMSE of 20) allowed to objectify the choice dimension among these four dimensions (understanding, reasoning, appreciation, choice). The performance of the DROM test must now be evaluated on a multicenter scale using an independent expert as the gold standard.
The objective is not to replace the clinical decision but to provide a tool allowing the clinician in his daily practice to argue the decision-making capacity and thus improve the care pathway by increasing the rate of agreement between the clinician and the patient. Failure to return home is often felt as an injustice by patients, providing support for understanding their situation can improve the experience of the situation.
Adding a decision support tool to the clinical decision to assess the capacity to decide whether to return home has better sensitivity in the assessment of the capacity to decide than that of clinical assessment alone.
The population to be studied will be made up of patients with a moderate neurocognitive disorder, a population for which the question of the ability to decide frequently arises, particularly when the patient still lives at home and is weakened by hospitalization. The question of returning home is essential for these patients for whom being sent to a retirement home is experienced as an injustice because it is a non-choice, sometimes even without having been consulted.
The DROM test: The elements of the DROM-test are detailed in the reference publication: 8 questions (understanding, appreciation, choice dimensions) and 4 clinical vignettes (reasoning, choice dimensions) each comprising 3 questions with a binary response.
Its structure includes a questionnaire part and a clinical vignette part improving patients' understanding. Its hetero-questionnaire format, its short administration time (10 min) and its simple instructions make it a tool that could be easily distributed in services receiving elderly people with neurocognitive disorders.
It was improved by taking into account the results of the initial study then after modification, it will be tested on 10 patients from the neuropsychogeriatrics department of Bretonneau hospital in order to reassess the good understanding and consistency of the test.
The DROM-test is given to the patient by their referring doctor. The detailed medical certificate of non-return home: It is a medical certificate produced by an expert doctor registered with a judicial court in France which aims to medically evaluate the capacity of a patient to return home. Usually this certificate is produced for protected adults and sent to the guardianship judge who subsequently decides on any act of disposition of the accommodation.
In this study, it is considered the Gold Standard because the only legally accepted document for this type of evaluation. It will be produced but not sent to court.
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.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Person aged 70 and over with a neurocognitive disorder and hospitalized in geriatrics
DROM-Test
DROM test: a tool for assessing the ability to decide on returning home
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
DROM-Test
DROM test: a tool for assessing the ability to decide on returning home
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* neurocognitive disorders regardless of diagnosis
* MMSE between 15 and 25
* hospitalized in geriatrics
* still living at home at the time of hospitalization
* affiliated to or beneficiary of a social security scheme
* confusional episode,
* palliative care,
* presence of another significant or systemic pathology: Cerebral Vascular Accident \< 3 months, oncological pathology during treatment, decompensated psychiatric illness, acute organ failure,
* total visual or hearing deficit,
* has already taken the DROM test during a previous hospitalization,
* language barrier,
* refusal of participation by the patient, their relative or guardian if applicable
* patient under judicial protection
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mouna Romdhani, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hôpital Bretonneau
Paris, , France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2024-A01838-39
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
APHP240159
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.