CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00763282Updated Apr 27, 2015Results posted

Self-Management to Prevent Ulcers in Veterans With SCI (Spinal Cord Injury)

An interventional study of Self Management (SM) and Motivational Interviewing (MI) in Pressure Ulcers and Spinal Cord Injuries, sponsored by US Department of Veterans Affairs. Completed at 5 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-04-27.

Sponsored by US Department of Veterans Affairs · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
144
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Pressure ulcers (PrUs) are the most frequent significant medical complication after spinal cord injury (SCI). PrU prevalence, morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates are high, and most persons with SCI will have at least one serious PrU during their lifetime. VA costs of treating the almost 3,500 unique Veterans with SCI and a severe ulcer at an SCI Center in FY10 was just under $400 million.

Read the detailed description

Background:

Pressure ulcers (PrUs) are the most frequent significant medical complication after spinal cord injury (SCI). PrU prevalence, morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates are high, and most persons with SCI will have at least one serious PrU during their lifetime. VA costs of treating the almost 3,500 unique Veterans with SCI and a severe ulcer at an SCI Center in 2010 was just under $400 million.

Objectives:

The primary objective of this randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to determine whether a multi-component self-management (SM) intervention increases the use of skin-protective behaviors and reduces skin worsening in Veterans with SCI, compared to an education control (ED) intervention. Secondary outcomes included PrU knowledge, self-management skills, communication with providers, self-efficacy, community integration and days on bedrest. Another objective was to conduct focus group interviews with patients and providers and to analyze transcripts of SM group sessions to determine barriers and facilitators with regard to spinal cord injury and pressure ulcer prevention.

Methods:

This was a multi-site efficacy intervention study with a single blind prospective randomized design. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographic and key variables. Supplemental focus group interviews were conducted with patients with SCI (n=35) and SCI providers (n=39). Focus group interviews and SM group calls were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using constant comparative techniques.

Study participants included Veterans hospitalized for Stage III/IV PrUs at or below the level of injury, from six VA SCI Centers around the country (Long Beach, Houston, Milwaukee, Augusta, Hines and St. Louis). Prior to discharge, PrU risk factors were identified and 1:1 PrU education was provided. Randomization and the behavioral interventions began at discharge. The number of randomized subjects were 72 in the ED group and 72 in the SM group (n=144). The analytic sample included subjects with complete data (n=92).

The intervention included 8 site coordinator-initiated calls using didactic (ED) or Motivational Interviewing (MI) strategies to address PrU risk factors. The second component included telephone group calls that included either didactic information about SCI or SM skills including: 1) knowledge about the medical condition; 2) self-monitoring; 3) problem-solving skills; 4) skill for managing the effects of the condition; 5) adherence to necessary health behaviors; and 6) self-advocacy with health care providers. ED subjects received general health information and were not instructed in any specific problem solving, self-monitoring or SM techniques. The ED intervention was comparable to the SM with respect to natural history/ time, dosing, measurement processes, attention, therapeutic alliance, social support, and in receiving a manualized treatment with specific therapist procedures. Self-reported outcome data were obtained by phone at 3 and 6 months, and from mailed photos of study ulcers.

Status:

Study is complete. Additional analyses are ongoing and future manuscripts are planned.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pressure Ulcers
  • Spinal Cord Injuries

Keywords

  • Spinal cord injuries
  • Pressure ulcers
  • Health behavior
  • self management
  • Rehabilitation
  • Outcome assessment
  • QUERI
  • Veterans
03

In context

Spinal Cord Injuries

1,948 studies on the registry are indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries; 505 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 144 is above the median of 24 across 1,566 interventional studies indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries.

Browse Spinal Cord Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

US Department of Veterans Affairs is the lead sponsor of 658 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • over 18 years of age,
  • SCI of at least six month's duration,
  • hospitalized for a Stage III or IV PrU,
  • cognitively intact,
  • available for telephone follow-up, and
  • discharged to a community setting or able to direct own care.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

We excluded patients with a terminal diagnosis, severe psychiatric comorbidities (eg, current psychosis), cognitive impairments that limited their ability to consent or participate, severe hearing loss, and wounds not expected to heal. People discharged to nursing homes unable to direct their own care were also excluded.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Investigator)
Enrollment
144 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    SM+MI

    Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI). Self Management and Motivational Interviewing (SM+MI) participants were assigned to both a self-management and motivational interview group. Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based form of counseling to help individuals to engage in behavior change. Self Management (SM) consists of: 1) on-site decisional support to promote provider adherence to ulcer management guidelines, 2) enhanced, interactive PrU education, 3) chronic disease self-management skill building via telephone based groups, 4) proactive care management using MI to support ongoing self-management activities, and 5) distance technology.

    Behavioral: Self Management (SM) · Behavioral: Motivational Interviewing (MI)

  • Active comparator
    ED

    Education (ED). An education control intervention (ED) designed to be a credible intervention that is comparable to the SM will control for potential effects of natural history/time, treatment dosing, measurement processes, attention, the non-specific effects of therapeutic alliance, social support, and of receiving a manualized treatment with specific therapist procedures. The ED intervention will differ only in that subjects will not be instructed in any specific problem solving, self-monitoring, or SM techniques, with the exception of encouraging them to become informed consumers of SCI care.

    Behavioral: Education (ED)

Interventions

  • BehavioralSelf Management (SM)

    Self Management (SM) consists of: 1) on-site decisional support to promote provider adherence to ulcer management guidelines, 2) enhanced, interactive PrU education, 3) chronic disease self-management skill building via telephone based groups, 4) proactive care management using MI to support ongoing self-management activities, and 5) distance technology.

  • BehavioralMotivational Interviewing (MI)

    Self Management and Motivational Interviewing (SM+MI) participants were assigned to both a self-management and motivational interview group. An education control intervention (ED) designed to be a credible intervention that is comparable to the SM will control for potential effects of natural history/time, treatment dosing, measurement processes, attention, the non-specific effects of therapeutic alliance, social support, and of receiving a manualized treatment with specific therapist procedures.

  • BehavioralEducation (ED)

    The ED intervention differs only in that subjects will not be instructed in any specific problem solving, self-monitoring, or SM techniques, with the exception of encouraging them to become informed consumers of SCI care.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Percent of Possible Self-Reported Skin Care Behaviors

    Skin Behavior Change was calculated as the percentage of Self-Reported Behavior at 3 and 6 months (minus the percentage at baseline). The study reported the number of guideline-recommended skin care behaviors, assessed by the Skin Care Behavior Checklist, a self-reported measure of adherence to 8 guideline recommended skin care behaviors. The average percentage of the 8 behaviors adhered to for each participant was measured by intervention arms at admission (baseline), 3 and 6 months post-discharge.

    Time frame: Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months

  2. Skin Behavior Change

    Self-reported improvement in skin care behaviors in the SM+MI versus ED control intervention arms. The study reported the number of guideline-recommended skin care behaviors, assessed by the Skin Care Behavior Checklist, a self-report measure of adherence to 8 skin care behaviors for each participant.The difference in the average percentage of the 8 behaviors adhered to by each participant was measured for the different intervention arms from admission (baseline) to 3 and 6 months post-discharge.

    Time frame: Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months

  3. Any Skin Worsening

    Skin worsening was defined as when a participant with an open wound at the time of discharge is found to have \>20% wound area at 3 or 6 months post-discharge (including new wounds and reopened wounds). Worsening was also defined as a when a participant with a closed wound at discharge is found to have a new or reopened wound at 3 or 6 months post-discharge.

    Time frame: 6 months

  4. Skin Status

    Skin worsening was defined as when a participant with an open wound at the time of discharge is found to have \>20% wound area at 3 or 6 months post-discharge (including new wounds and reopened wounds). Worsening was also defined as a when a participant with a closed wound at discharge is found to have a new or reopened wound at 3 or 6 months post-discharge.

    Time frame: Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Mean Number of Skin-related Admissions

    Post-discharge skin-related hospitalizations were for both groups (SM+MI vs. ED) but not as study-related or as an adverse event. This study examined an outpatient intervention during which rehospitalization could be triggered by the participants' early reporting of skin breakdown.

    Time frame: Discharge to end of study (6 months)

07

Results

Posted Jan 8, 2015
Limitations and caveats
The study was underpowered because of difficulties encountered with recruitment and retention. Delivering an adequate "dose" of the treatments and site coordinator fidelity to the MI intervention were also limitations.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
Started7272
Completed4038
Not completed3234
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject65
Withdrew: Death43
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up2226

Outcome measures

PrimaryPercent of Possible Self-Reported Skin Care Behaviors

Skin Behavior Change was calculated as the percentage of Self-Reported Behavior at 3 and 6 months (minus the percentage at baseline). The study reported the number of guideline-recommended skin care behaviors, assessed by the Skin Care Behavior Checklist, a self-reported measure of adherence to 8 guideline recommended skin care behaviors. The average percentage of the 8 behaviors adhered to for each participant was measured by intervention arms at admission (baseline), 3 and 6 months post-discharge.

Time frame:
Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months
Reported as:
Mean · % of Possible Self-Reported Behaviors
Percent of Possible Self-Reported Skin Care Behaviors
% of Possible Self-Reported BehaviorsSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
Admission73.8 ± 23.374.1 ± 18.6
3 Months83.5 ± 17.579.5 ± 19.6
6 Months85.0 ± 15.283.0 ± 14.6
PrimarySkin Behavior Change

Self-reported improvement in skin care behaviors in the SM+MI versus ED control intervention arms. The study reported the number of guideline-recommended skin care behaviors, assessed by the Skin Care Behavior Checklist, a self-report measure of adherence to 8 skin care behaviors for each participant.The difference in the average percentage of the 8 behaviors adhered to by each participant was measured for the different intervention arms from admission (baseline) to 3 and 6 months post-discharge.

Time frame:
Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months
Reported as:
Mean · % Change
Skin Behavior Change
% ChangeSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
Baseline to 3 months9.7 ± 19.35.4 ± 22.9
Baseline to 6 months11.3 ± 20.08.9 ± 18.1
PrimaryAny Skin Worsening

Skin worsening was defined as when a participant with an open wound at the time of discharge is found to have \>20% wound area at 3 or 6 months post-discharge (including new wounds and reopened wounds). Worsening was also defined as a when a participant with a closed wound at discharge is found to have a new or reopened wound at 3 or 6 months post-discharge.

Time frame:
6 months
Reported as:
Number · participants
Any Skin Worsening
participantsSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
No3633
Yes3539
PrimarySkin Status

Skin worsening was defined as when a participant with an open wound at the time of discharge is found to have \>20% wound area at 3 or 6 months post-discharge (including new wounds and reopened wounds). Worsening was also defined as a when a participant with a closed wound at discharge is found to have a new or reopened wound at 3 or 6 months post-discharge.

Time frame:
Admission (Baseline), 3 months, 6 months
Reported as:
Number · participants
Skin Status
participantsSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
No Skin Worsening3633
Worse 0-3 Months2628
Worse 4-6 Months911
SecondaryMean Number of Skin-related Admissions

Post-discharge skin-related hospitalizations were for both groups (SM+MI vs. ED) but not as study-related or as an adverse event. This study examined an outpatient intervention during which rehospitalization could be triggered by the participants' early reporting of skin breakdown.

Time frame:
Discharge to end of study (6 months)
Reported as:
Mean · admissions/participant
Mean Number of Skin-related Admissions
admissions/participantSM+MI GroupED Group
Mean Number of Skin-related Admissions1.5 ± 0.81.6 ± 0.7

Adverse events

Collected over 6 Months. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)—4/72 (5.6%)0/72 (0%)
Education (ED)—3/72 (4.2%)0/72 (0%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventSelf Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)
DeathInvestigations4/723/72

Baseline characteristics

For the SM+MI arm there was 1 death (post-randomization, pre-data collection) which accounts for the discrepency between starting participants (72) and baseline participants (71) for that group.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
Mean59.4 (34 to 83)59.0 (22 to 85)59.3 (22 to 85)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
Female224
Male6970139
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race/Ethnicity, Customized(participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
White465298
Black201838
Hispanic426
Other101
Residence Type
Residence Type(participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
House5056106
Apartment151227
Nursing Home101
Other549
Marital Status
Marital Status(participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
Married292857
Never Married111021
Widowed5611
Divorced252752
Live with Partner011
Missing101
Educational Level
Educational Level(participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
High School Graduate or Lower232245
Some College353873
College Graduate10919
Graduate School336
Duration of Spinal Cord Injury
Duration of Spinal Cord Injury(years)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
Mean23.8 (0.5 to 61.3)24.0 (0.5 to 60.9)24.0 (0.5 to 61.3)
Etiology
Etiology(participants)Self Management (SM) + Motivational Interviewing (MI)Education (ED)Total
Driving353570
Diving549
Fall5611
Gunshot Wound61117
Other201636

14 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

08

Study locations

5 sites
  • VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA
    Long Beach, California 90822, United States
  • Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center, Augusta, GA
    Augusta, Georgia 30904, United States
  • Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL
    Hines, Illinois 60141-5000, United States
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
  • Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53295-1000, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Guihan M, Bombardier CH, Ehde DM, Rapacki LM, Rogers TJ, Bates-Jensen B, Thomas FP, Parachuri R, Holmes SA. Comparing multicomponent interventions to improve skin care behaviors and prevent recurrence in veterans hospitalized for severe pressure ulcers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Jul;95(7):1246-1253.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.01.012. Epub 2014 Jan 30. PubMed 24486242 ↗
10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 27, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00763282
Lead sponsor
US Department of Veterans Affairs
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 30, 2008
Start date
Nov 2008
Primary completion
Jun 2011
Completion
Dec 2011
Results posted
Jan 8, 2015
Last update
Apr 27, 2015

Study contacts

Marylou Guihan, PhD MA BA
principal investigator · Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2014. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion