An interventional study of Patient education materials and Physician peer-comparison email in Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice and Health Care Utilization, sponsored by Brigham and Women's Hospital. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-11-17.
Sponsored by Brigham and Women's Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the impact of patient and provider facing educational materials and peer comparison on medical testing conversations during annual physicals. The investigators hypothesize that education materials and peer comparison will improve conversation quality about medical testing decisions.
Medical tests may show unexpected findings leading to additional tests, treatments, and visits that cost money and take time but may not have benefits. This is a prevalent issue with major consequences for patients and clinicians. Making informed decisions about when to order medical tests may help avoid unnecessary costs and worry. However, doctors don't always have detailed conversations about medical testing and there are patient gaps in knowledge. The investigators hypothesize that education materials and peer comparison to promote conversations about medical tests will improve conversation quality about medical testing decisions. The investigators have developed patient and provider-facing interventions to educate on and promote conversations about the uses and consequences of medical tests, and the investigators will test the impact of this just-in-time educational and peer comparison intervention on the likelihood of patients having productive conversations about medical tests. The effects of the intervention will be assessed using surveys before and after the study. This work has the potential to help patients feel more supported by their healthcare system, empower patients to participate in shared decision-making, and build trust between patients and clinicians.
406 studies on the registry are indexed under Behavior; 167 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 329 is above the median of 120 across 316 interventional studies indexed under Behavior.
Browse Behavior studies →Brigham and Women's Hospital is the lead sponsor of 1,263 studies on the registry; 225 are open to participants now.
Of its 116 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 65 (56%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Inclusion criteria (Physicians):
Inclusion criteria (Patients):
Intervention arm physicians will receive an email with feedback on how they compare to their peers in aggregate on test ordering during annual physicals, along with physician-facing education materials. This email will be sent before each patient study visit for all patients in the study. Participating patients of intervention arm physicians will receive patient education materials one to two days before their study visit.
Behavioral: Patient education materials · Behavioral: Physician peer-comparison email · Behavioral: Physician education materials
Control arm physicians receive an email with information on the general visit preparation tips that their patients will receive. Participating patients of control arm physicians will receive general visit preparation tips one to two days before their study visit.
Behavioral: General visit preparation materials
Patients receive a text-message and email with educational materials about medical testing.
Physicians receive an email with feedback on how they compare to their peers in aggregate on test ordering during annual physicals.
Physicians receive reference materials on medical test interpretation and incidental findings.
Patients receive a text-message and email with general visit preparation tips.
Shared Decision-Making Process 4 Survey
Composite score of survey items completed by the patient after physician visit. Min 0, Max 4 (higher is better).
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Presence of testing discussion
Binary measure from patient post-visit survey (present vs absent)
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Satisfaction with testing discussion
Binary measure from patient post-visit survey (high vs low)
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Discussion of next steps
Binary measure from patient post-visit survey (present vs absent)
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Whether doctor explained tests in a way that was easy to understand
Binary measure from patient post-visit survey (yes completely vs yes a little or no)
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Patient knowledge
Composite score of survey items from patient post-visit survey. Min 0, Max 4 (higher is better).
Time frame: Within two weeks after visit
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2022. 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.
Brigham and Women's Hospital →