ClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT04551157Updated Jan 13, 2023

Impact of Psychoeducational Video on Adjustment to Open Fracture.

An interventional study of Video Viewing in Major Trauma, sponsored by Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust. Terminated at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-01-13.

Sponsored by Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Why this study was terminated
Unable to recruit during Covid \& funding no longer available
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
22
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The multi-disciplinary team involved in the care of major trauma patients with open fractures has developed two novel patient information videos. They include practical advice from staff about the recovery process, images of the wound throughout the healing process and ways to cope with the range of emotional responses that patients report following an open fracture. The experiences of previous patients are also included. The aim of this project is to evaluate the impact of viewing these videos on patients' ability to follow treatment recommendations made by the team, as well as their psychological and social functioning, as measured by standardised questionnaire responses. Additionally, the patient's experience of viewing the videos, in terms of how relevant and useful they found them, will be evaluated.

Read the detailed description

High levels of psychological difficulty are often reported by patients with an open fracture. These patients frequently describe feeling distressed by the initial appearance of their scars and can struggle to adjust and prepare for the challenges they face on discharge from hospital. Patients' expectations about the appearance of their wounds and their role in the recovery process may be aided with access to visual material that the patient and their family can revisit as often as is helpful to them.

Therefore, the multi-disciplinary team involved in the care of these patients has developed two novel patient information videos. They include practical advice from staff about the recovery process, images of the wound throughout the healing process and ways to cope with the range of emotional responses that patients report following an open fracture. The experiences of previous patients are also included. The aim of this project is to evaluate the impact of viewing these videos on patients' ability to follow treatment recommendations made by the team, as well as their psychological and social functioning, as measured by standardised questionnaire responses. Additionally, the patient's experience of viewing the videos, in terms of how relevant and useful they found them, will be evaluated.

All adult patients with an open fracture attending the John Radcliffe Hospital Major Trauma Centre will be eligible to take part (unless they have a diagnosis of dementia, active delirium or traumatic brain injury). Participation will involve completing questionnaires whilst in hospital (within the first week and prior to discharge) and at a routine 3-month follow-up appointment. Patients will be randomly selected to either view the videos or receive treatment as usual. The questionnaire responses of patients in these two groups will be compared to help evaluate the videos.

02

Conditions studied

  • Major Trauma

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • major trauma
  • open fracture
  • intervention
  • appearance
03

In context

Fractures, Open

53 studies on the registry are indexed under Fractures, Open; 14 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 22 is below the median of 90 across 40 interventional studies indexed under Fractures, Open.

Browse Fractures, Open studies →

Lead sponsor

Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust is the lead sponsor of 94 studies on the registry; 7 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

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.

Inclusion criteria

  • Participant is willing and able to give for participation in the study.
  • Male or Female, aged 18 years or above.
  • Fluent in English.
  • Diagnosed with an open fracture.
  • Inpatient stay of >72 hours.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Participant has a diagnosis of dementia.
  • Participant is experiencing delirium.
  • Participant has a complete spinal fracture.
  • Participant has a traumatic brain injury with a presentation.
  • Participant is unable to provide written consent.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
22 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Video Viewing

    Participants will receive the intervention where they will view two patient information videos. The first video will be viewed within the first week of their inpatient stay and the second video will be viewed just before discharge.

    Other: Video Viewing

  • No intervention
    Treatment as usual

    No change to routine care.

Interventions

  • OtherVideo Viewing

    Two patient information videos containing practical advice from staff about the recovery process, images of the wound throughout the healing process and ways to cope with the range of emotional responses that patients report following an open fracture.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Clinical Outcomes Routine Evaluation 10 (CORE-10)

    The CORE-10 is a brief, generic and easy-to-use measure of psychological distress. It is a self-report questionnaire with ten items about how the respondent has been feeling over the last week, with a 5-point Likert scale (Not at all/Only occasionally/Sometimes/Often/Most of the time). These items cover symptoms (depression, anxiety, trauma, physical problems), functioning (general, social and close relationships sub-domains) and risk to self. All items are summed (items 2 and 3 are reversed scored). The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychological distress. The clinical cut-off score for general psychological distress is 11.0. The clinical cut-off for depression is 13.0 (sensitivity and specificity values of .92 and 0.72 respectively).

    Time frame: 3-7 days after hospital admission (Timepoint 1 - baseline)

  2. Clinical Outcomes Routine Evaluation 10 (CORE-10)

    The CORE-10 is a brief, generic and easy-to-use measure of psychological distress. It is a self-report questionnaire with ten items about how the respondent has been feeling over the last week, with a 5-point Likert scale (Not at all/Only occasionally/Sometimes/Often/Most of the time). These items cover symptoms (depression, anxiety, trauma, physical problems), functioning (general, social and close relationships sub-domains) and risk to self. All items are summed (items 2 and 3 are reversed scored). The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychological distress. The clinical cut-off score for general psychological distress is 11.0. The clinical cut-off for depression is 13.0 (sensitivity and specificity values of .92 and 0.72 respectively).

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  3. Clinical Outcomes Routine Evaluation 10 (CORE-10)

    The CORE-10 is a brief, generic and easy-to-use measure of psychological distress. It is a self-report questionnaire with ten items about how the respondent has been feeling over the last week, with a 5-point Likert scale (Not at all/Only occasionally/Sometimes/Often/Most of the time). These items cover symptoms (depression, anxiety, trauma, physical problems), functioning (general, social and close relationships sub-domains) and risk to self. All items are summed (items 2 and 3 are reversed scored). The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychological distress. The clinical cut-off score for general psychological distress is 11.0. The clinical cut-off for depression is 13.0 (sensitivity and specificity values of .92 and 0.72 respectively).

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

  4. Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress Scale

    This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

    Time frame: 3-7 days after hospital admission (Timepoint 1 - baseline)

  5. Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress Scale

    This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  6. Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress Scale

    This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

  7. Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ)

    The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley \& Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

    Time frame: 3-7 days after hospital admission (Timepoint 1 - baseline)

  8. Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ)

    The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley \& Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  9. Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ)

    The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley \& Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

  10. General Adherence Measure

    This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

    Time frame: 3-7 days after hospital admission (Timepoint 1 - baseline)

  11. General Adherence Measure

    This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  12. General Adherence Measure

    This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

  13. Condition specific statements about treatment and scarring

    This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

    Time frame: 3-7 days after hospital admission (Timepoint 1 - baseline)

  14. Condition specific statements about treatment and scarring

    This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  15. Condition specific statements about treatment and scarring

    This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Intervention acceptability and feasibility measure

    This is a 10-item measure developed specifically for the purpose of this study by the chief investigator. Patients are asked to respond to 6 statements on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitively disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). This includes items such as 'the videos contained information that was relevant to me' and 'I found the videos upsetting to watch'. The minimum score is 6 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating higher acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. There are an additional 2 items asking the patient whether the time that they viewed video 1 and video 2 respectively was too soon after the injury, about right or too late after the injury.

    Time frame: 7-14 days after admission (Timepoint 2 - prior to discharge)

  2. Intervention acceptability and feasibility measure

    This is a 10-item measure developed specifically for the purpose of this study by the chief investigator. Patients are asked to respond to 6 statements on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitively disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). This includes items such as 'the videos contained information that was relevant to me' and 'I found the videos upsetting to watch'. The minimum score is 6 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating higher acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. There are an additional 2 items asking the patient whether the time that they viewed video 1 and video 2 respectively was too soon after the injury, about right or too late after the injury.

    Time frame: 3-months post-injury (Timepoint 3 - follow-up)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • John Radcliffe Hospital
    Oxford, Oxfordshire OX3 9DU, United Kingdom
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Dec 2020 to primary completion in Aug 2021, 7 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 3, 2020
First posted
Sep 16, 2020
StartActual
Dec 3, 2020
Primary completionActual
Aug 1, 2021
CompletionActual
Nov 1, 2021
Last update
Jan 13, 2023
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 13, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04551157
Lead sponsor
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust
Responsible party
Louise Quarmby (Primary Investigator, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 16, 2020
Start date
Dec 3, 2020
Primary completion
Aug 1, 2021
Completion
Nov 1, 2021
Last update
Jan 13, 2023

Study contacts

May Quarmby, D Clin
principal investigator · Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Jan 2023. 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