An interventional study of Person-centred integrated care intervention and Usual care in Chronic Condition and Chronic Conditions, Multiple, sponsored by Radboud University Medical Center. Completed at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-11-18.
Sponsored by Radboud University Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Chronic diseases and multimorbidity are increasingly prevalent. However, over the last decades, attempts at improving primary care for chronic diseases have been focussed on the management of individual chronic diseases and single disease management (SDM) programs have been implemented in Dutch primary care. This causes multiple problems for patients with one or more chronic diseases, such as negative interaction between treatment of single diseases, high treatment burden, negative patient experiences, lack of attention for problems in other domains of life that may interact with the chronic disease, and difficulties in shared decision making by the use of strict protocols in SDM programs. A person-centred and holistic approach is widely recognized as the solution to the problems observed in chronic disease care. Therefore, we guided three large Dutch primary care cooperatives, who have been organizing SDM programmes on diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2), COPD, and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in primary care for the last decades, with the development of a new generic disease management (GDM) programme including a person-centered and holistic approach (CMO 2019-5756). The three primary care cooperatives have recently conducted a pilot study in which we evaluated the feasibility of the programme (CMO 2021-8106) to further optimise its content and procedures. In the coming years, all three primary care cooperatives will gradually implement the optimised programme in all general practices in their regions. In the current study, our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the GDM programme on Quadruple Aim outcomes, i.e. patient experiences, population health, health care provider experiences, and cost effectiveness. We will conduct a cluster randomized controlled trial in the three primary care cooperatives with a follow-up of 12 months. Fifteen practices will be randomised to either care as usual according to the current SDM programmes, or to the GDM programme including a person-centered and holistic care approach. Approximately 40 patients per practice with DM2, COPD and/or CVD will be recruited.
Rationale: Chronic diseases and multimorbidity are increasingly prevalent. However, over the last decades, attempts at improving primary care for chronic diseases have been focussed on the management of individual chronic diseases and single disease management (SDM) programs have been implemented in Dutch primary care. This causes multiple problems for patients with one or more chronic diseases, such as negative interaction between treatment of single diseases, high treatment burden, negative patient experiences, lack of attention for problems in other domains of life that may interact with the chronic disease, and difficulties in shared decision making by the use of strict protocols in SDM programs. A person-centred and holistic approach is widely recognized as the solution to the problems observed in chronic disease care. Therefore, we guided three large Dutch primary care cooperatives, who have been organizing SDM programmes on diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2), COPD, and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in primary care for the last decades, with the development of a new generic disease management (GDM) programme including a person-centered and holistic approach (CMO 2019-5756). The three primary care cooperatives have recently conducted a pilot study in which we evaluated the feasibility of the programme (CMO 2021-8106) to further optimise its content and procedures. In the coming years, all three primary care cooperatives will gradually implement the optimised programme in all general practices in their regions.
Objective: In the current study, our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the GDM programme on Quadruple Aim outcomes, i.e. patient experiences, population health, health care provider experiences, and cost effectiveness.
Study design: we will conduct a cluster randomized controlled trial in the three primary care cooperatives with a follow-up of 12 months. Fifteen practices will be randomised to either care as usual according to the current SDM programmes, or to the GDM programme including a person-centered and holistic care approach. Approximately 40 patients per practice with DM2, COPD and/or CVD will be recruited.
Study population: all patients with DM2, COPD and/or CVD who currently receive SDM according to the SDM programmes of the participating primary care cooperatives are eligible to participate.
Intervention: a GDM programme including person-centered and holistic care. This programme will replace the SDM programmes for DM2, COPD and CVD that are currently used in the participating primary care cooperatives.
Main study parameters/endpoints: effectiveness will be evaluated by Quadruple Aim outcomes at baseline, at 6 months, and at 12 months follow-up by comparing changes in the intervention group with the comparator group. Patient experiences will be measured with the P3CEQ questionnaire. Population health will be measured with the PROMIS Global-10 questionnaire. Self-management will be measured with the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) score. Healthcare professional experiences will be measured with the MASGZ and the COPILOT questionnaire. Data for calculating costs and conducting a cost-effectiveness analyses will be measured by the Medical Consumption questionnaire and the EQ-5D questionnaire and by process outcomes such as the number and type of consultations and referrals, and duration of consultations from the Electronical Medical Files. At 12 months, a purposive sample of patients and professionals will participate in focus group interviews to collect information on experiences and facilitators and barriers for further implementation. Also, the competences needed by the healthcare professionals to provide personalised and integrated chronic care will be explored.
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness:
89 studies on the registry are indexed under Multiple Chronic Conditions; 16 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 842 is above the median of 128 across 71 interventional studies indexed under Multiple Chronic Conditions.
Browse Multiple Chronic Conditions studies →Radboud University Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 986 studies on the registry; 136 are open to participants now.
Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Compared within Multiple Chronic Conditions, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Chronic Disease. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →
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:
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.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.
COPD
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Life expectancy
The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Practices in the control group provide care as usual, which consists of the SDM programmes according to the national care standards and General Practice guidelines (NHG) for DM2, COPD and CVD. According to these protocolised programmes, patients with COPD, CVD or DM2 visit their general practice at a standard frequency per year (1 - 4 times) and standard monitoring measurements and topics are discussed. The practices that are randomised to the control group will not receive any additional training related to this study.
Other: Usual care
The core of the person-centered and holistic approach is a cyclical process. The practice nurse in the general practice will act as case manager and can consult the general practitioner or other health providers when necessary. The first step in the intervention is assessing the integral health status of the patient (health across multiple domains, including physiological measurements and symptoms of disease), using a (preferably digital) questionnaire at home and physical measurements. The second step is discussing the results with the patient in a semi-structured way. Personal goals are formulated in the third step. In the fourth step, the healthcare professional and patient will choose through shared-decision making the most appropriate interventions and support to achieve these goals, which are documented in a personal healthcare plan. Next, referrals are made if necessary and the treatment is started. An evaluation is planned and carried out, if necessary multiple times.
Behavioral: Person-centred integrated care intervention
See arm description.
See arm description.
Composite score HRQoL & patient-experienced quality of healthcare
% difference between intervention group and control group of dichotomous composite score ( yes / no MCID improvement in health-related quality of life or quality of healthcare), which is based on the scores of PROMIS dimensions (GPH, GPM) and the P3CEQ-score.
Time frame: 12 months
Global Physical Health
Physical aspect of health-related quality of life as measured by the PROMIS-Global 10 instrument (T-scores; higher T-score indicates better physical aspect of HrQoL)
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Global Mental Health
Mental aspect of health-related quality of life as measured by the PROMIS-Global 10 instrument (T-scores; higher T-score indicates better mental aspect of HrQoL)
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Patient-experienced quality of care
Person-centredness of care as measured by the Person Centred Coordinated Care Experience Questionnaire (P3CEQ) instrument; minimum score 0, maximum score 30, higher score equals better P3CE.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Patient activation as measured by PAM
Patient activation as measured by the Patient Activation Measure instrument; minimum 0, maximum 100, higher score equals better patient activation.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Health-related quality of life as measured by the EQ-5D-5L instrument
Health-related quality of life as measured by the EQ-5D-5L instrument; minimum 0, maximum 1, higher score equals better HrQoL
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Health care use according to patient
Health care use (number of consultations, number of hospital visits) according to Medical Consumption Questionnaire
Time frame: Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, 12 months
BMI
Combined length and weight according to practice data
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
HbA1c
According to practice data
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Blood glucose
According to practice data
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Blood LDL-cholesterol
According to practice data
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Systolic and diastolic blood pressure
According to practice data
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Positive affect of healthcare providers
Satisfaction with job according to selection of MAS-GZ instrument (minimum 8, maximum 40, higher score indicates higher positive affect)
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
Experience of healthcare providers
Satisfaction with job according to selection of CO-PILOT instrument (minimum 1, maximum 10, higher score is better experience of healthcare providers)
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: Undecided
Ran from Jan 2023 to primary completion in Sep 2024, 20 months.
Of 59 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Multiple Chronic Conditions, half reached primary completion within 20 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 37. This study's 20 months is close to that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 59 studies reached it within 20 months; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 37.
Multiple Chronic Conditions covers many different conditions, not one, so the studies compared here vary widely. Read these figures as a rough guide.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2023. 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.
Radboud University Medical Center →