Implementing a Mobile Health Application for Women Veterans With Urinary Incontinence (MyHealtheBladder): Function QUERI 3.0
NCT ID: NCT07219433
Last Updated: 2025-10-21
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
20 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2026-10-01
2030-09-30
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.
High-Risk Veteran Initiative
NCT05050643
The Integration of Sensor Technology Into Incontinence Materials: a Single-group Pretest-posttest Study in a Nursing Home Environment
NCT05316012
Digital Bridge: Using Technology to Support Patient-centered Care Transitions From Hospital to Home
NCT04287192
Improving Service Delivery Through Access Points
NCT00012623
HIRREM for Stage 1 Primary Hypertension
NCT03479697
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
MHB is an interactive mobile health application designed to deliver evidence-based behavioral self-management instruction specifically for women Veterans (WV). In a multi-site RCT (VA IIR HX002827) conducted in VA (n=286) comparing MyHealtheBladder to video visits via VA Video Connect (VVC) delivered by a trained Continence Care provider, MHB resulted in equivalent or greater improvements in UI symptoms and satisfaction compared with VVC. Engagement in MHB was high, with 70% retention and an average of 58 miles saved per Veteran. MHB does not require a clinical visit and has the potential to scale across other VA facilities and generate healthcare savings while maintaining comparable patient-level outcomes to individual clinical encounters.
Objectives. The investigators plan to develop scalable approaches to implement and sustain MyHealtheBladder as well as evaluate reach with foundational support versus the enhanced-implementation strategy (Reach+Equity bundle).
Key questions. How can the Reach+Equity bundle be optimized to implement MHB? What are shareholder perspectives on refinements needed for MHB foundational REP activities, as well as strategies to enhance equitable reach (Reach+Equity bundle)? Are there differences in implementation outcomes (reach, adoption, fidelity, cost) between arms? What are patient-level effectiveness outcomes (urinary symptom severity, quality of life, satisfaction with treatment) among WV who enroll, and do these differ between arms? Are there changes in UI diagnosis rates at implementing sites, and between arms? To address the question: Are there differences in implementation outcomes (reach \[primary\], fidelity, adoption) between arms? The investigators will use generalized linear models to examine the effect of foundational REP vs. Reach+Equity on implementation outcomes of reach and fidelity at 6, 12, and 18-months (primary). To address the question: Are there differences in effectiveness outcomes (UI severity, QoL, satisfaction) between arms? The investigators will describe effectiveness/quality outcomes for WVs who enroll in MHB, overall and by study arm. Linear mixed effect models including all time points for patient outcomes will be fit to account for clustering of WV within site and repeated measures of patient outcomes.
Methodology. To evaluate implementation, the investigators will randomize sites (n=20) 1:1 to either foundational support or foundational support plus the Reach+Equity bundle. The investigators will use generalized linear models to examine the effect of foundational vs. Reach+Equity on implementation outcomes at 18-months.
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.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Foundational Support
Foundational Support uses the Replicating Effective Program (REP) implementation strategy and includes 5 elements that were developed and tested in our prior Function QUERI work: shareholder engagement, MHB toolkit, Online shared resources (SharePoint) access for clinical program training materials, data reports to assist sites with tracking their data, and Diffusion Networks to promote peer-to-peer sharing and implementation support.
Implementation Strategy: Foundational Support
The primary goal of MHB is to compare implementation approaches while also gathering information on clinical effects of the EBP in its new context. All sites will be randomized to receive 1) foundational REP implementation support alone or 2) foundational REP and Reach+Equity. We propose that low intensity implementation support that promotes engagement with the MHB app (defined as foundational support), will be sufficient for some but not all facilities to successfully incorporate MHB into routine practice.
Reach+Equity Bundle
The Reach+Equity bundle will include the same activities as foundational support plus the Reach+Equity bundle activities which include: 1) external facilitation (provide an outside perspective to help sites identify barriers, develop effective strategies, and navigate complex change processes particularly through the lens of achieving equitable reach); 2) equity in implementation toolkit (guide that supports awareness and consideration of health equity during the implementation process); and 3) equity-focused data-driven monitoring (inform progress regarding equitable reach-related goals).
Implementation Strategy: Reach+Equity Bundle
We hypothesize that adding the Reach+Equity bundle to foundational REP, compared to foundational REP alone, will result in superior implementation outcomes.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Implementation Strategy: Foundational Support
The primary goal of MHB is to compare implementation approaches while also gathering information on clinical effects of the EBP in its new context. All sites will be randomized to receive 1) foundational REP implementation support alone or 2) foundational REP and Reach+Equity. We propose that low intensity implementation support that promotes engagement with the MHB app (defined as foundational support), will be sufficient for some but not all facilities to successfully incorporate MHB into routine practice.
Implementation Strategy: Reach+Equity Bundle
We hypothesize that adding the Reach+Equity bundle to foundational REP, compared to foundational REP alone, will result in superior implementation outcomes.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Have any type of Urinary Incontinence existing for at least 3 months
Exclusion Criteria
* No email account
* Institutionalized
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
VA Office of Research and Development
FED
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.
Karen Goldstein, MD MSPH
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
Alayne D Markland, DO MSc
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, AL
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
Durham, North Carolina, United States
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.
QUX 25-003
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.