An interventional study of Medication Guides and SMART Program in Rheumatoid Arthritis, sponsored by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 99 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-01-18.
Sponsored by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The aim of the proposed project is to compare the effectiveness of two strategies designed to enhance patient understanding of medication risks/benefits: (1) Medication Guides, mandated for many medications by the Food and Drug Administration and (2) Drug Facts Boxes, developed by Woloshin and Schwartz to enhance the usability of consumer medication information. The investigators will also assess whether the effectiveness of these communication strategies can be increased by Gist Reasoning Training, which is designed to enhance patients' ability to extract meaningful gist from complex information.The investigators anticipate enrolling 300 individuals with rheumatoid arthritis. The study will use a randomized controlled trial design with four study arms. Data will be collected primarily via self-administered, Internet-based surveys using REDCap. All participants will be followed for 6 months after the completion of baseline data collection.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic, autoimmune disorder affecting 0.5% to 1% of the adult population in developed countries worldwide. Current guidelines underscore the importance of aggressive treatment of RA with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDS) to control inflammation. Aggressive treatment has been shown to improve patient-centered outcomes, including better symptom control, functional status, and health-related quality of life and reduce the risk of premature death. A major issue in implementing aggressive therapy in practice, however, involves patient reluctance to escalate therapy when they believe that their symptoms are tolerable, despite the presence of active disease, due to concerns about medications risks. Moreover, patients often find it difficult to obtain accurate and personally-relevant information about medication risks and benefits that is written in language they can understand. There is a clear gap between the information patients want about medication risks and benefits and the information they currently receive as part of routine care.
The aim of the proposed project is to compare the effectiveness of two strategies designed to enhance patient understanding of medication risks/benefits: (1) Medication Guides, mandated for many medications by the Food and Drug Administration and (2) Drug Facts Boxes, developed by Woloshin and Schwartz to enhance the usability of consumer medication information. The investigators will also assess whether the effectiveness of these communication strategies can be increased by Gist Reasoning Training, which is designed to enhance patients' ability to extract meaningful gist from complex information.
2,962 studies on the registry are indexed under Arthritis, Rheumatoid; 396 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 286 is above the median of 94 across 2,027 interventional studies indexed under Arthritis, Rheumatoid.
Browse Arthritis, Rheumatoid studies →University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill is the lead sponsor of 1,366 studies on the registry; 133 are open to participants now.
Of its 158 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 139 (88%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
1. Hearing or visually impaired
Approximately 75 participants will be assigned to this study group. Participants will ONLY receive medication guides, or other comparable Consumer Medication Information (CMI), for rheumatoid arthritis medications.
Behavioral: Medication Guides
Approximately 75 participants will be assigned to this study group. Participants will receive medication guides, or other comparable Consumer Medication Information (CMI), for rheumatoid arthritis medications AND will be enrolled into the Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Training (SMART) Program.
Behavioral: Medication Guides · Behavioral: SMART Program
Approximately 75 participants will be assigned to this study group. Participants will ONLY receive Drug Facts Boxes for rheumatoid arthritis medications.
Behavioral: Drug Facts Boxes
Approximately 75 participants will be assigned to this study group. Participants will receive Drug Facts Boxes for rheumatoid arthritis medicationsAND will be enrolled into the Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Training (SMART) Program.
Behavioral: SMART Program · Behavioral: Drug Facts Boxes
The investigators will compare the effectiveness of two types of written prescription drug information targeted for patients: (1) Medication Guides mandated by the Food and Drug Administration, and (2) Drug Facts Boxes, developed by Woloshin and Schwartz.
The investigators will determine if the effectiveness of written medication information can be increased by Gist Reasoning Training, delivered via the SMART Program, which is designed to enhance patients' ability to extract meaningful gist from complex information.
The investigators will compare the effectiveness of two types of written prescription drug information targeted for patients: (1) Medication Guides mandated by the Food and Drug Administration, and (2) Drug Facts Boxes, developed by Woloshin and Schwartz.
Percentage of Participants Classified as Having Made an Informed Decision at 6 Months
Informed decision making is characterized by making a value-consistent decision based on accurate knowledge. Knowledge will be assessed as described under Outcome 2. Values will be assessed using a 10-item scale developed by Fraenkel et al. Scores on this scale can range from 0 to 10, with lower scores reflecting a reluctance to use medications to control disease activity. Participants will be classified as having made an informed choice if they: (1) answered at least 85% of the knowledge items correctly, scored 6 or more on the values scale, and are currently taking one or more DMARDS OR (2) answered 85% of the knowledge items correctly, scored 5 or less on the values measure, and are not currently taking a DMARD. Otherwise, individuals will be classified as not having made an informed choice.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Knowledge of the Risks and Benefits Associated With DMARD Therapy at 6 Months Adjusted for Baseline
Knowledge of DMARD risks and benefits will be assessed by measures developed by Fraenkel et al., Barton et al., and Fayet et al. The combined measure will have a total of 36 items. Most items are answered on a true/false scale (with a don't know option provided). Each correct response will receive 1-point (maximum of 36 points). Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater knowledge.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Values at 6-Months Adjusted for Baseline
Values. Questions included in the self-administered questionnaires asked participants to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with 10 simple values statements (e.g., It is OK to ignore the risk of a serious side effect if it is extremely rare; It is better to continue with the pain I know than to change my medications) developed by Fraenkel and colleagues. Responses were recorded on a 4-point scale ranging from 1=Strongly Agree to 4=Strongly Disagree. Responses were then summed and rescored to yield a composite scale that ranged from -15 to +15, where positive numbers reflected values favoring the use of medications to control rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Gist Reasoning Ability, Lesson Quality at 6 Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
The investigators used the Test of Strategic Learning (TOSL) to quantify participants' ability to abstract gist meanings from complex text. The TOSL consists of 4 text passages varying in length (from 291 to 575 words) and complexity. Each participant responded to one passage at each time point. Participants were asked to provide a summary of the original text, focused on bottom-line-meaning rather than specific details. Responses were scored to assess the quality of high-level interpretations (Lesson Quality, range 0 to 5) using an objective scoring system by a trained and experienced rater, blinded to participants' group assignment and time point of testing. Higher scores reflect better lesson quality.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Gist Reasoning Ability, Complex Abstraction at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
The investigators used the Test of Strategic Learning (TOSL) to quantify participants' ability to abstract gist meanings from complex text. The TOSL consists of 4 text passages varying in length (from 291 to 575 words) and complexity. Each participant responded to one passage at each time point. Participants were asked to provide a summary of the original text, focused on bottom-line-meaning rather than specific details. Responses were scored to assess the number of abstracted ideas (Complex Abstraction, range 0 to 8) using an objective scoring system by a trained and experienced rater, blinded to participants' group assignment and time point of testing. Higher scores indicate more ideas abstracted. The investigators will assess change in the total score over time from baseline to 6 month follow-up.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Satisfaction With Medication Information at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
This outcome will be assessed by the 17-item Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS). Items ask participants to rate the amount of information they have received about different aspects of their medications. Responses are summed across items to yield a total score with a possible range of 0 to 17, with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction with the amount of information received.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Overall Treatment Satisfaction at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) will be used to assess treatment satisfaction. TSQM-9 has 3 subscales: effectiveness, convenience and overall satisfaction. Items ask participants to rate their satisfaction with difference aspect of their treatment regimen on a 7-point scale with endpoints labeled, Extremely Dissatisfied (1) and Extremely Satisfied (7). Internal consistency of each subscale has been demonstrated with Cronbach's alpha exceeding 0.80 for each sub-scale. Each subscale has been shown to discriminate between individuals classified as exhibiting Low vs. Medium medication adherence. The investigators combined items across all three subscales to yield a measure of overall treatment satisfaction (range: 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction).
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Arthritis Self-Efficacy at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
The investigators will assess confidence in one's ability to manage arthritis symptoms in different situations via the 8-item Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (e.g., keep pain from interfering with things participants want to do). Responses are recorded on a 100-point scale with endpoints labeled "Very Uncertain" and "Very Certain". This measure has been widely used in arthritis patient populations for over two decades and has been shown to have excellent psychometric properties, including high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha generally exceeds 0.90) and sensitivity to change following participation in illness self-management programs. To create a total scale score, the investigators summed participant responses across the items in the scale and divided by the number of items answered. Thus, the scale has a possible range of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Medication Adherence at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Medication Adherence was assessed by a single question that asked: "All things considered, how much of the time do you use your RA medications EXACTLY as directed?" Responses were recorded on a 100-point visual analog scale with endpoints labeled "None of the Time" and "All of the time". Higher values reflect greater medication adherence.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Illness Intrusiveness at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Illness Intrusiveness will be assessed by the 13-item Illness Intrusiveness Ratings Scale. Items ask respondents to rate the degree to which their "illness and/or its treatment" interferes with aspects of life that are essential for quality of life. Responses will be recorded on a visual analog scale, with endpoints labeled Not Very Much (0) and Very Much (100). The instrument will be scored by summing across all items and dividing by the number of items answered to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 100 where higher values reflect greater illness intrusiveness.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Health Distress at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Health Distress will be assessed by the 4-item measure developed by Lorig and colleagues. This measure was adapted from the Medical Outcomes Study health distress scare for use in arthritis populations. The adapted measure has demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha= .87) and responsiveness to change following completion of an arthritis self-management course. Participants will respond to each question on a 6-point scale, ranging from None of the Time (0) to All of the Time (5). Thus, the total score will range from 0 to 5, with higher scores reflecting greater Health Distress.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Global Health Status at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
This outcome will be assessed by a single-item asking participants to rate their current health on a 5-point scare where 1=Poor, 2=Fair, 3= Good, 4= Very Good, and 5= Excellent. This item is part of the Medical Outcomes Study Core Survey Instrument and responses have been shown to predict mortality and health care utilization as well as multi-item health status measures.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Disease Activity at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Disease Activity will be assess using the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). This instrument is based on the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ), which is adapted from the standard HAQ. The RAPID3 includes the 3 Core Data Set measures of physical function, pain, and patient global estimate. The score for physical function ranges from 0 to 10 and is calculated by adding the ten activities of daily living, each scored from 0 to 3 by the patient and dividing the total raw score by 3. Pain and global estimate of health are measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10. The three 0-10 scores for physical function, pain, and global assessment of health are added together and divided by 3 to create a composite score, ranging from 0 to 10. Higher values reflect greater disease activity.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Depression at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Depression will be assessed using the Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) Version 1 item bank. Raw scores are rescaled to a standardized T-score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10. The United States general population is used as the reference group. A higher T-score represents greater depression.Thus, a person who has a T-score of 70 is two SDs above the average level of depression observed in the referenced population.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Fatigue at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Fatigue will be assessed using the Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) Version 1 item bank. Raw scores are rescaled to a standardized T-score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10. The United States general population is used as the reference group. A higher T-score represents greater fatigue.Thus, a person who has a T-score of 70 is two SDs above the average level of fatigue observed in the referenced population.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Health Literacy at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
Health literacy will be assessed via the Newest Vital Sign (NVS). This instrument, which tests literacy skills for both numbers and words, has been validated against a previously validated measure of health literacy (the TOFHLA). Participants are given a specially designed ice cream nutrition label to review and are asked a series of questions about the label. 1-point is given for each correct answer (maximum of 6 points). Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater health literacy.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Information Seeking: Participating in BetterChoices, BetterHealth
After the 6 week follow-up interview, all participants were given an opportunity to take part in the BetterChoices, BetterHealth program. To assess information seeking, the investigators tracked whether or not participants enrolled in the class and attended at least one class session. This variable was coded such that: 0=Either did not enroll or did not attend any class sessions, 1=Enrolled and attended at least one class session.
Time frame: 6 months
Information Seeking: Use of RA Self-Management Website
The investigators created a website that provided easy access to information about RA, treatment options, and self-management strategies. Participants were emailed a link to this website immediately after completion of 6-week follow-up data collection. The investigators used Google analytics to track whether participants accessed the website.
Time frame: 6 months
Mean Visual Selective Learning at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline
The Visual Selective Learning (VSL) task will be administered as part of telephone interviews by showing participants 3 lists of 16 words via a PowerPoint presentation embedded in a YouTube video. Each word will appear on a separate screen for 1 second. Half of the words will be in uppercase and half will be in lowercase. In some trials, participants will be instructed that uppercase words are valued at 10 points and lowercase words at 1 point; in other trials, the point value was the opposite. Participants will be told to remember as many words as they could, but that their goal is to earn as many points as possible. Different word lists will be used at each time point and the lists will be balanced across participants over the course of the study using procedures parallel to those for the TOSL. At each time point, scores will be summed across the three lists, yielding a composite score with a possible range from 0 to 264, with higher numbers reflect greater VSL.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
Mean Medication Self-Management Knowledge
Medication Self-Management Knowledge will be assessed using a 45-item medication-specific measure tailored to the medications each participant reports using and developed specifically for this study. The questions will draw on information found in the medication information provided to participants. Correct answers will be summed across the 45 items. Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater knowledge.
Time frame: 6 months
Mean Verbatim Recall of Information Concerning Medication Benefits and Risks
Verbatim recall of information concerning potential medication benefits and harms will be assessed by medication-specific items developed specifically for this study. For each medication, the investigators will identify one potential benefit and one potential harm listed in the Drug Facts Box. Each question will ask participants about the probability of benefit/harm using a multiple-choice response format. To minimize response burden, participants will be asked these questions in relation to only one of their current RA medications. Correct responses will be summed across the benefit and harm items to yield a score ranging from 0 to 2. Higher numbers reflect greater verbatim recall.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Patient Interest in Information About Treatment Options: Viewed at Least One Webpage
After participants complete the baseline questionnaire, they were directed to a website that provides written prescription drug information for medications used to treat RA. From baseline to the 6-month follow-up, the investigators electronically tracked the number of webpages viewed and whether participants viewed any of the webpages.
Time frame: 6 months
Patient Interest in Information About Treatment Options: Number of Pages Viewed
After participants complete the baseline questionnaire, they were directed to a website that provides written prescription drug information for medications used to treat RA. From baseline to the 6-month follow-up, the investigators electronically tracked the number of webpages viewed and whether participants viewed any of the webpages.
Time frame: 6 months
Percentage of Participants Using a DMARD (Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug) at 6-Month Follow-up
DMARD usage will be assessed via online questionnaires. Participants will be shown a checklist of 19 medications used to treat RA (abatacept, adalimumab, azathioprine, certolizumab pegol, cyclosporine, etanercept, golimumab, gold, hydroxychloroquine, infliximab, leflunomide, methotrexate pill, methotrexate shot, minocycline, rituximab, sulfasalazine, tocilizumab infusion, tocilizumab shot, and tofacitinib) and asked to check all of those that they are currently using. Participants will also be to check an option labeled None of the above. DMARD Usage will be scored as "0" if the participant reports using no DMARDS and "1" if the participant reports using one or more DMARDS.
Time frame: Month 6 Follow-up
| Milestone | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Started | 78 | 77 | 65 | 66 |
| Completed | 68 | 52 | 60 | 44 |
| Not completed | 10 | 25 | 5 | 22 |
| Withdrew: Lost to follow-up | 7 | 11 | 2 | 9 |
| Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject | 3 | 14 | 3 | 13 |
Informed decision making is characterized by making a value-consistent decision based on accurate knowledge. Knowledge will be assessed as described under Outcome 2. Values will be assessed using a 10-item scale developed by Fraenkel et al. Scores on this scale can range from 0 to 10, with lower scores reflecting a reluctance to use medications to control disease activity. Participants will be classified as having made an informed choice if they: (1) answered at least 85% of the knowledge items correctly, scored 6 or more on the values scale, and are currently taking one or more DMARDS OR (2) answered 85% of the knowledge items correctly, scored 5 or less on the values measure, and are not currently taking a DMARD. Otherwise, individuals will be classified as not having made an informed choice.
| percentage of participants | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Not Informed Per Criteria | 59.7 | 44.2 | 49.2 | 55.8 |
| % Informed Per Criteria | 40.3 | 55.8 | 50.9 | 44.2 |
Knowledge of DMARD risks and benefits will be assessed by measures developed by Fraenkel et al., Barton et al., and Fayet et al. The combined measure will have a total of 36 items. Most items are answered on a true/false scale (with a don't know option provided). Each correct response will receive 1-point (maximum of 36 points). Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater knowledge.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Knowledge of the Risks and Benefits Associated With DMARD Therapy at 6 Months Adjusted for Baseline | 81.9 ± 0.9 | 84.0 ± 1.1 | 82.1 ± 1.0 | 84.4 ± 1.2 |
Values. Questions included in the self-administered questionnaires asked participants to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with 10 simple values statements (e.g., It is OK to ignore the risk of a serious side effect if it is extremely rare; It is better to continue with the pain I know than to change my medications) developed by Fraenkel and colleagues. Responses were recorded on a 4-point scale ranging from 1=Strongly Agree to 4=Strongly Disagree. Responses were then summed and rescored to yield a composite scale that ranged from -15 to +15, where positive numbers reflected values favoring the use of medications to control rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Values at 6-Months Adjusted for Baseline | 6.3 ± 0.4 | 5.6 ± 0.4 | 5.5 ± 0.4 | 5.8 ± 0.5 |
The investigators used the Test of Strategic Learning (TOSL) to quantify participants' ability to abstract gist meanings from complex text. The TOSL consists of 4 text passages varying in length (from 291 to 575 words) and complexity. Each participant responded to one passage at each time point. Participants were asked to provide a summary of the original text, focused on bottom-line-meaning rather than specific details. Responses were scored to assess the quality of high-level interpretations (Lesson Quality, range 0 to 5) using an objective scoring system by a trained and experienced rater, blinded to participants' group assignment and time point of testing. Higher scores reflect better lesson quality.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Gist Reasoning Ability, Lesson Quality at 6 Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.2 |
The investigators used the Test of Strategic Learning (TOSL) to quantify participants' ability to abstract gist meanings from complex text. The TOSL consists of 4 text passages varying in length (from 291 to 575 words) and complexity. Each participant responded to one passage at each time point. Participants were asked to provide a summary of the original text, focused on bottom-line-meaning rather than specific details. Responses were scored to assess the number of abstracted ideas (Complex Abstraction, range 0 to 8) using an objective scoring system by a trained and experienced rater, blinded to participants' group assignment and time point of testing. Higher scores indicate more ideas abstracted. The investigators will assess change in the total score over time from baseline to 6 month follow-up.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Gist Reasoning Ability, Complex Abstraction at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 1.8 ± 0.2 |
This outcome will be assessed by the 17-item Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS). Items ask participants to rate the amount of information they have received about different aspects of their medications. Responses are summed across items to yield a total score with a possible range of 0 to 17, with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction with the amount of information received.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Satisfaction With Medication Information at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 13.0 ± 0.4 | 12.6 ± 0.5 | 12.6 ± 0.5 | 12.4 ± 0.6 |
The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) will be used to assess treatment satisfaction. TSQM-9 has 3 subscales: effectiveness, convenience and overall satisfaction. Items ask participants to rate their satisfaction with difference aspect of their treatment regimen on a 7-point scale with endpoints labeled, Extremely Dissatisfied (1) and Extremely Satisfied (7). Internal consistency of each subscale has been demonstrated with Cronbach's alpha exceeding 0.80 for each sub-scale. Each subscale has been shown to discriminate between individuals classified as exhibiting Low vs. Medium medication adherence. The investigators combined items across all three subscales to yield a measure of overall treatment satisfaction (range: 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction).
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Overall Treatment Satisfaction at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 69.4 ± 1.9 | 64.6 ± 2.1 | 66.0 ± 2.0 | 68.4 ± 2.5 |
The investigators will assess confidence in one's ability to manage arthritis symptoms in different situations via the 8-item Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (e.g., keep pain from interfering with things participants want to do). Responses are recorded on a 100-point scale with endpoints labeled "Very Uncertain" and "Very Certain". This measure has been widely used in arthritis patient populations for over two decades and has been shown to have excellent psychometric properties, including high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha generally exceeds 0.90) and sensitivity to change following participation in illness self-management programs. To create a total scale score, the investigators summed participant responses across the items in the scale and divided by the number of items answered. Thus, the scale has a possible range of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Arthritis Self-Efficacy at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 47.4 ± 2.0 | 48.4 ± 2.3 | 49.4 ± 2.2 | 44.9 ± 2.7 |
Medication Adherence was assessed by a single question that asked: "All things considered, how much of the time do you use your RA medications EXACTLY as directed?" Responses were recorded on a 100-point visual analog scale with endpoints labeled "None of the Time" and "All of the time". Higher values reflect greater medication adherence.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Medication Adherence at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 92.3 ± 1.4 | 87.9 ± 1.7 | 95.5 ± 1.6 | 92.2 ± 1.9 |
Illness Intrusiveness will be assessed by the 13-item Illness Intrusiveness Ratings Scale. Items ask respondents to rate the degree to which their "illness and/or its treatment" interferes with aspects of life that are essential for quality of life. Responses will be recorded on a visual analog scale, with endpoints labeled Not Very Much (0) and Very Much (100). The instrument will be scored by summing across all items and dividing by the number of items answered to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 100 where higher values reflect greater illness intrusiveness.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Illness Intrusiveness at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 49.7 ± 1.8 | 50.0 ± 2.1 | 45.5 ± 2.1 | 45.7 ± 2.5 |
Health Distress will be assessed by the 4-item measure developed by Lorig and colleagues. This measure was adapted from the Medical Outcomes Study health distress scare for use in arthritis populations. The adapted measure has demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha= .87) and responsiveness to change following completion of an arthritis self-management course. Participants will respond to each question on a 6-point scale, ranging from None of the Time (0) to All of the Time (5). Thus, the total score will range from 0 to 5, with higher scores reflecting greater Health Distress.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Health Distress at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 2.2 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 2.4 ± 0.2 |
This outcome will be assessed by a single-item asking participants to rate their current health on a 5-point scare where 1=Poor, 2=Fair, 3= Good, 4= Very Good, and 5= Excellent. This item is part of the Medical Outcomes Study Core Survey Instrument and responses have been shown to predict mortality and health care utilization as well as multi-item health status measures.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Global Health Status at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 |
Disease Activity will be assess using the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). This instrument is based on the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ), which is adapted from the standard HAQ. The RAPID3 includes the 3 Core Data Set measures of physical function, pain, and patient global estimate. The score for physical function ranges from 0 to 10 and is calculated by adding the ten activities of daily living, each scored from 0 to 3 by the patient and dividing the total raw score by 3. Pain and global estimate of health are measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10. The three 0-10 scores for physical function, pain, and global assessment of health are added together and divided by 3 to create a composite score, ranging from 0 to 10. Higher values reflect greater disease activity.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Disease Activity at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 4.3 ± 0.2 | 4.4 ± 0.2 | 4.2 ± 0.2 | 4.2 ± 0.2 |
Depression will be assessed using the Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) Version 1 item bank. Raw scores are rescaled to a standardized T-score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10. The United States general population is used as the reference group. A higher T-score represents greater depression.Thus, a person who has a T-score of 70 is two SDs above the average level of depression observed in the referenced population.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Depression at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 49.7 ± 0.5 | 50.4 ± 0.6 | 50.4 ± 0.6 | 50.2 ± 0.7 |
Fatigue will be assessed using the Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) Version 1 item bank. Raw scores are rescaled to a standardized T-score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10. The United States general population is used as the reference group. A higher T-score represents greater fatigue.Thus, a person who has a T-score of 70 is two SDs above the average level of fatigue observed in the referenced population.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Fatigue at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 53.8 ± 0.7 | 53.9 ± 0.8 | 54.3 ± 0.8 | 55.3 ± 0.9 |
Health literacy will be assessed via the Newest Vital Sign (NVS). This instrument, which tests literacy skills for both numbers and words, has been validated against a previously validated measure of health literacy (the TOFHLA). Participants are given a specially designed ice cream nutrition label to review and are asked a series of questions about the label. 1-point is given for each correct answer (maximum of 6 points). Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater health literacy.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Health Literacy at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 73.9 ± 2.8 | 75.9 ± 3.3 | 73.9 ± 3.2 | 72.0 ± 3.7 |
After the 6 week follow-up interview, all participants were given an opportunity to take part in the BetterChoices, BetterHealth program. To assess information seeking, the investigators tracked whether or not participants enrolled in the class and attended at least one class session. This variable was coded such that: 0=Either did not enroll or did not attend any class sessions, 1=Enrolled and attended at least one class session.
| Participants | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participated in at least one session | 15 | 10 | 14 | 11 |
| Did not participate in any sessions | 60 | 63 | 50 | 54 |
The investigators created a website that provided easy access to information about RA, treatment options, and self-management strategies. Participants were emailed a link to this website immediately after completion of 6-week follow-up data collection. The investigators used Google analytics to track whether participants accessed the website.
| Participants | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visited website at least one time | 13 | 10 | 17 | 10 |
| Did not visit website | 57 | 61 | 46 | 51 |
The Visual Selective Learning (VSL) task will be administered as part of telephone interviews by showing participants 3 lists of 16 words via a PowerPoint presentation embedded in a YouTube video. Each word will appear on a separate screen for 1 second. Half of the words will be in uppercase and half will be in lowercase. In some trials, participants will be instructed that uppercase words are valued at 10 points and lowercase words at 1 point; in other trials, the point value was the opposite. Participants will be told to remember as many words as they could, but that their goal is to earn as many points as possible. Different word lists will be used at each time point and the lists will be balanced across participants over the course of the study using procedures parallel to those for the TOSL. At each time point, scores will be summed across the three lists, yielding a composite score with a possible range from 0 to 264, with higher numbers reflect greater VSL.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Visual Selective Learning at 6-Month Follow-up Adjusted for Baseline | 120.1 ± 6.4 | 109.3 ± 7.3 | 104.2 ± 7.6 | 99.2 ± 8.4 |
Medication Self-Management Knowledge will be assessed using a 45-item medication-specific measure tailored to the medications each participant reports using and developed specifically for this study. The questions will draw on information found in the medication information provided to participants. Correct answers will be summed across the 45 items. Scores transformed to a 100-point scale (ranging from 0-100) with higher values reflecting greater knowledge.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Medication Self-Management Knowledge | 62.4 ± 1.2 | 64.9 ± 1.0 | 65.1 ± 1.1 | 66.1 ± 1.3 |
Verbatim recall of information concerning potential medication benefits and harms will be assessed by medication-specific items developed specifically for this study. For each medication, the investigators will identify one potential benefit and one potential harm listed in the Drug Facts Box. Each question will ask participants about the probability of benefit/harm using a multiple-choice response format. To minimize response burden, participants will be asked these questions in relation to only one of their current RA medications. Correct responses will be summed across the benefit and harm items to yield a score ranging from 0 to 2. Higher numbers reflect greater verbatim recall.
| score on a scale | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Verbatim Recall of Information Concerning Medication Benefits and Risks | 0.60 ± 0.09 | 0.56 ± 0.10 | 0.44 ± 0.08 | 0.49 ± 0.12 |
After participants complete the baseline questionnaire, they were directed to a website that provides written prescription drug information for medications used to treat RA. From baseline to the 6-month follow-up, the investigators electronically tracked the number of webpages viewed and whether participants viewed any of the webpages.
| Participants | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viewed at least one page | 30 | 18 | 35 | 28 |
| Did not view any web pages | 48 | 59 | 30 | 38 |
After participants complete the baseline questionnaire, they were directed to a website that provides written prescription drug information for medications used to treat RA. From baseline to the 6-month follow-up, the investigators electronically tracked the number of webpages viewed and whether participants viewed any of the webpages.
| pages viewed | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient Interest in Information About Treatment Options: Number of Pages Viewed | 1.63 ± 2.8 | 1.39 ± 4.1 | 2.63 ± 4.0 | 2.06 ± 4.0 |
DMARD usage will be assessed via online questionnaires. Participants will be shown a checklist of 19 medications used to treat RA (abatacept, adalimumab, azathioprine, certolizumab pegol, cyclosporine, etanercept, golimumab, gold, hydroxychloroquine, infliximab, leflunomide, methotrexate pill, methotrexate shot, minocycline, rituximab, sulfasalazine, tocilizumab infusion, tocilizumab shot, and tofacitinib) and asked to check all of those that they are currently using. Participants will also be to check an option labeled None of the above. DMARD Usage will be scored as "0" if the participant reports using no DMARDS and "1" if the participant reports using one or more DMARDS.
| percentage of participants | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Using a DMARD | 93.9 | 86.5 | 93.2 | 93.0 |
| % Not Using a DMARD | 6.1 | 13.5 | 6.8 | 7.0 |
Collected over 6 months. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Other CMI Only | 0/78 (0%) | 0/78 (0%) | 0/78 (0%) |
| Other CMI & SMART Program | 0/77 (0%) | 0/77 (0%) | 0/77 (0%) |
| Drug Facts Boxes Only | 0/65 (0%) | 0/65 (0%) | 0/65 (0%) |
| Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | 0/66 (0%) | 0/66 (0%) | 0/66 (0%) |
| Age, Continuous(years) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 55.5 ± 10.8 | 54.7 ± 11.8 | 56.2 ± 10.1 | 54.9 ± 14.7 | 55.3 ± 11.9 |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 70 | 69 | 60 | 59 | 258 |
| Male | 8 | 8 | 5 | 7 | 28 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hispanic or Latino | 3 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 17 |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 66 | 64 | 54 | 52 | 236 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 33 |
| Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Asian | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Black or African American | 12 | 10 | 11 | 11 | 44 |
| White | 58 | 62 | 47 | 47 | 214 |
| More than one race | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 5 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 18 |
| Region of Enrollment(Participants) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 78 | 77 | 65 | 66 | 286 |
| Met Criteria for Informed Decision-Making(Participants) | Other CMI Only | Other CMI & SMART Program | Drug Facts Boxes Only | Drug Facts Boxes & SMART Program | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count of participants | 29 | 28 | 25 | 20 | 102 |
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: Yes — The investigators will create a web-site to disseminate study findings. Access to the website will not be restricted in any way. The website will provide a link for individuals to obtain a copy of study data. Individuals will be required to complete a form to request the data, indicating their name, contact information, and the research questions they plan to address. The investigators will then provide individuals with a complete, cleaned, deidentified copy of the final Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) dataset and a copy of the study protocol which will include all of the information needed to replicate the analyses or perform secondary analyses. The investigators will use SharePoint to provide these materials to those who request them. The link providing access to study data will appear and be active within nine months following the final year of funding. The reason for not putting the data onto the study website is to enable the investigators to track data usage.
Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Analytic code
Time frame: All materials will be made available by 2/15/2020 and will remain available via the website for at least two years.
Access criteria: Completion of a form indicating the name of the requester, contact information, and the research questions the requester plans to address. Completion of this form is only required to ensure that the requester is not a bot.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2019. 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 North Carolina, Chapel Hill →