An interventional study of Virtual care visit in Parkinson Disease, sponsored by University of Rochester. Completed at 3 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 30 Years to 120 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-02-23.
Sponsored by University of Rochester · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy and the value of providing care to individuals with Parkinson disease directly into their homes. The specific aims are:
4,487 studies on the registry are indexed under Parkinson Disease; 1,082 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 277 is above the median of 40 across 3,294 interventional studies indexed under Parkinson Disease.
Browse Parkinson Disease studies →University of Rochester is the lead sponsor of 715 studies on the registry; 116 are open to participants now.
Of its 56 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 44 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
One-time virtual care visit for Parkinson disease.
Other: Virtual care visit
Video-conferencing visit with a Parkinson disease specialist
Also known as: Telemedicine visit, Virtual house call
Feasibility
The percent of telemedicine visits completed as scheduled. (Goal \>80%)
Time frame: 6 months
Change in Quality of Life as Measured by the PDQ-39 Assessment Tool
The impact on Quality of life (QoL) as measured by the change in PDQ-39 score from baseline to 6 months. The PDQ-39 is a 39-item self-report questionnaire, which assesses Parkinson's disease-specific health related quality over the last month. 5-point ordinal scoring system: 0 = never, 1 = occasionally, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often, 4 = always. Each dimension total score range from 0 (never have difficulty) to 100 (always have difficulty). Lower scores reflect better quality of life.
Time frame: Baseline and 6 months
Acceptability
- The percent of patients participated who stated that they are interested in receiving ongoing care for their PD via telemedicine. (Goal \>80%)
Time frame: 6 months
Feasibility (Descriptive)
Percentage of physician visits where the physician was were satisfied or very satisfied with the virtual visit overall.
Time frame: 6 months
Percentage of Patients Who Felt That the Recommendations Improved Their Health
Time frame: 6 months
Recruitment was primarily online through mass email messaging from the Davis Phinney Foundation, internet listings on Fox Trial Finder, messages from PatientsLikeMe, Google AdWords in eligible states, and outreach to support groups.
| Milestone | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Started | 277 |
| Completed | 258 |
| Not completed | 19 |
| Withdrew: Technology incompatibility | 9 |
| Withdrew: Lack of efficacy | 4 |
| Withdrew: Physician decision | 3 |
| Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject | 2 |
| Withdrew: Protocol violation | 1 |
The percent of telemedicine visits completed as scheduled. (Goal \>80%)
| percentage of visits | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Feasibility | 91 |
The impact on Quality of life (QoL) as measured by the change in PDQ-39 score from baseline to 6 months. The PDQ-39 is a 39-item self-report questionnaire, which assesses Parkinson's disease-specific health related quality over the last month. 5-point ordinal scoring system: 0 = never, 1 = occasionally, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often, 4 = always. Each dimension total score range from 0 (never have difficulty) to 100 (always have difficulty). Lower scores reflect better quality of life.
| units on a scale | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Change in Quality of Life as Measured by the PDQ-39 Assessment Tool | 0.4 (-1.5 to 0.6) |
- The percent of patients participated who stated that they are interested in receiving ongoing care for their PD via telemedicine. (Goal \>80%)
| percentage of participants | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Acceptability | 74 |
Percentage of physician visits where the physician was were satisfied or very satisfied with the virtual visit overall.
| percentage of visits | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Feasibility (Descriptive) | 94 |
| percentage of participants | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Percentage of Patients Who Felt That the Recommendations Improved Their Health | 56 |
Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virtual Care Visit | — | 0/277 (0%) | 0/277 (0%) |
| Age, Continuous(years) | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Mean | 67.1 ± 9.1 |
| Gender(Participants) | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| Female | 138 |
| Male | 139 |
| Region of Enrollment(participants) | Virtual Care Visit |
|---|---|
| United States | 277 |
This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
University of Rochester