Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 1:31 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-27 @ 11:50 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT01456494
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2019-06-18
First Post:
2011-10-14
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
True
Brief Title:
Teaching Use of Respiratory Inhalers (TURI)
Sponsor:
University of Chicago
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Teaching Use of Respiratory Inhalers (TURI)
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2018-05
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
TURI
Brief Summary:
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of enrolling and randomizing patients into one of two educational interventions to teach appropriate respiratory inhaler technique and to collect preliminary estimates of the comparative effectiveness of two types of education.
Teach-to-Goal (TTG) education employs instruction followed by patient "teach-back," then repeated cycles of learning and assessment until a skill, i.e. respiratory inhaler technique, is mastered. By contrast, Brief Intervention (BI) education only consists of providing the patient with verbal and written instruction on the skill, i.e., respiratory inhaler technique.
The investigators hypothesize that hospital-based TTG compared to BI increases a patient's ability to learn respiratory inhaler technique. The investigators will test this hypothesis separately for the MDI and Diskus® devices.
Teach-to-Goal (TTG) education employs instruction followed by patient "teach-back," then repeated cycles of learning and assessment until a skill, i.e. respiratory inhaler technique, is mastered. By contrast, Brief Intervention (BI) education only consists of providing the patient with verbal and written instruction on the skill, i.e., respiratory inhaler technique.
The investigators hypothesize that hospital-based TTG compared to BI increases a patient's ability to learn respiratory inhaler technique. The investigators will test this hypothesis separately for the MDI and Diskus® devices.
Detailed Description:
Respiratory inhalers are often used incorrectly by hospitalized patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). As the mainstay of bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory therapy for these patients, the implication of this difficulty with self-management is that patients are at risk for under-treatment and worse health outcomes. Several factors are thought to contribute to poor self-management skills, particularly inadequate patient education at healthcare encounters and inadequate patient health literacy (HL; ability to understand and use healthcare instructions). Inadequate HL in patients with asthma leads to worse knowledge about medications in general and inhaler technique specifically, and patients with inadequate HL are more likely to be hospitalized. As a result, national and international guidelines for both asthma and COPD recommend patient education to improve self-management skills regarding use of respiratory inhalers and assessing patient comprehension at all points of care, including hospitals. However, the most effective strategy to instruct patients about respiratory inhaler use in hospital settings is unclear, particularly in populations enriched with inadequate HL.
Teach-to-goal (TTG) is a method of patient instruction that employs repeated rounds of teaching and assessments of patient comprehension until mastery is confirmed. Our preliminary data in hospitalized patients suggest that TTG may be a particularly powerful method to teach this high-risk population how to use respiratory inhalers correctly, including patients with inadequate HL. However, TTG is likely to be more resource-intensive (personnel training and time) than approaches used in everyday clinical settings (usual care). Further, the relative magnitude of the effectiveness of TTG compared to other less resource-intensive methods on patient comprehension and health outcomes is not known. As healthcare resources are limited, empiric data about the comparative effectiveness of TTG and alternate approaches of patient education are needed.
Therefore this pilot comparative effectiveness study will compare the TTG approach versus a brief intervention (BI) for patients hospitalized with asthma or COPD to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized clinical trial of two educational interventions in this population and to collect preliminary estimates of the relative benefits of TTG vs. BI. These data will help inform the design of subsequent larger studies of comparative effectiveness.
The primary research goal is to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized clinical trial of two different strategies to teach respiratory inhaler use and to determine preliminary estimates of effect size for the interventions; specifically, the investigators will assess our recruitment and retention rates, pilot test case reports and other study procedures and to evaluate the resources (staff \& investigator time, costs for patient incentives and other study materials) needed to perform the trial. These data will inform subsequent studies by providing important information regarding feasibility, effect size for sample calculations and preliminary data to secure funding for the development of further research. The Specific Aims are:
Specific Aim 1: To evaluate the feasibility of enrolling and randomizing patients into an educational intervention to teach appropriate respiratory inhaler technique.
Specific Aim 2: To obtain a preliminary estimate of the effect size of TTG vs. BI in order to determine the necessary sample size for a larger comparative effectiveness study designed to improve health outcomes.
Teach-to-goal (TTG) is a method of patient instruction that employs repeated rounds of teaching and assessments of patient comprehension until mastery is confirmed. Our preliminary data in hospitalized patients suggest that TTG may be a particularly powerful method to teach this high-risk population how to use respiratory inhalers correctly, including patients with inadequate HL. However, TTG is likely to be more resource-intensive (personnel training and time) than approaches used in everyday clinical settings (usual care). Further, the relative magnitude of the effectiveness of TTG compared to other less resource-intensive methods on patient comprehension and health outcomes is not known. As healthcare resources are limited, empiric data about the comparative effectiveness of TTG and alternate approaches of patient education are needed.
Therefore this pilot comparative effectiveness study will compare the TTG approach versus a brief intervention (BI) for patients hospitalized with asthma or COPD to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized clinical trial of two educational interventions in this population and to collect preliminary estimates of the relative benefits of TTG vs. BI. These data will help inform the design of subsequent larger studies of comparative effectiveness.
The primary research goal is to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized clinical trial of two different strategies to teach respiratory inhaler use and to determine preliminary estimates of effect size for the interventions; specifically, the investigators will assess our recruitment and retention rates, pilot test case reports and other study procedures and to evaluate the resources (staff \& investigator time, costs for patient incentives and other study materials) needed to perform the trial. These data will inform subsequent studies by providing important information regarding feasibility, effect size for sample calculations and preliminary data to secure funding for the development of further research. The Specific Aims are:
Specific Aim 1: To evaluate the feasibility of enrolling and randomizing patients into an educational intervention to teach appropriate respiratory inhaler technique.
Specific Aim 2: To obtain a preliminary estimate of the effect size of TTG vs. BI in order to determine the necessary sample size for a larger comparative effectiveness study designed to improve health outcomes.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: