CClinicalTrials.gg
Enrolling by invitationNCT06304428PRISMUpdated Jan 16, 2026

Prevention of Injury in Skilled Nursing Facilities Through Optimizing Medications

An interventional study of Deprescribing Care Model and Bone Health Service Model in Accidental Falls/Prevention and Control and Osteoporosis, sponsored by Duke University. Enrolling by invitation at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 65 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-01-16.

Sponsored by Duke University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
3,780
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
65 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare three care models for optimizing medications and preventing falls with broken bones in patients receiving rehabilitation after a hospitalization for a broken bone.

The primary outcome is injurious falls, with secondary outcomes measuring how the process of care is changed and capturing patient-reported outcomes valued by stakeholders.

The main questions this study aims to answer are:

  • Which of the three models is more effective in preventing falls with fractures?
  • What are the differences in patient-centered outcomes amongst the three models? These include pain, depression, anxiety, sleep, medication side effect burden, and fear of falling.
  • What are the differences in osteoporosis treatment and medication burden?

The three care models are: a Deprescribing Care Model designed to reduce or stop fall-related medications, a Bone Heath Service Model designed to provide osteoporosis evaluation and management, and an Injury Prevention Service Model offering both services.

42 SNFs will participate in this study. The three models will be incorporated into the routine care of patients at these facilities who are receiving rehabilitation after a hospitalization for a fracture. All care models will be delivered remotely to patients in the SNF and after they transition home by a post-fracture nurse consultant supported by an interprofessional team.

This study has three aims. See Detailed Description for more details. This ClinicalTrials.gov record represents the Comparative Effectiveness Aim of the protocol.

Read the detailed description

After hospitalization for fracture, approximately 60% of older adults receive post-acute care in Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs), but fewer than 20% of these individuals receive medication optimization, which is evidence-based care known to prevent additional injurious falls, fractures, and mortality. Therefore, there is an opportunity to substantially improve care and patient outcomes in this setting. The purpose of this study is to determine the comparative efficacy of a Deprescribing Care Model designed to deprescribe fall related medications (FRIDs), a Bone Heath Service Model designed to provide osteoporosis evaluation and management, or an Injury Prevention Service Model offering both services. All care models will be delivered remotely to patients in the SNF and after they transition home by a post-fracture nurse consultant supported by an interprofessional team. The primary outcome is injurious falls, with secondary outcomes measuring how the process of care is changed and capturing patient-reported outcomes valued by stakeholders.

Our Specific aims are to:

  1. Conduct a randomized cluster crossover trial in fracture patients comparing the effectiveness of the Deprescribing Care Model, Bone Health Service Model, or Injury Prevention Service Model in 42 SNFs, with each SNF receiving 6 months of each intervention in random sequence. We will test for clinically important differences in patient-centered outcomes (living with medicines survey, PHQ-8 depression scale, anxiety, sleep, and pain scales) at 90 days and implementation measures osteoporosis prescriptions, drug burden) at the time of discharge.
  2. Compare the effectiveness of the Deprescribing Care Model, Bone Health Service Model, or Injury Prevention Service Model on subsequent injurious fall and fractures for patients treated within the 42 randomized SNFs with those in 168 matched concurrent control SNFs. We will use data from the National Institute on Aging-funded Long-Term Care Data Cooperative which includes Minimum Data Set (MDS), Electronic Health Record (EHR), and Medicare (CMS) claims. To address decisional dilemmas, we will examine differences in efficacy by baseline estimated life expectancy and cognitive status.
  3. Identify SNF characteristics associated with measures of effective model implementation. We hypothesize that organizational factors captured by SNF staff responses to surveys capturing organizational readiness for change will explain additional variance in implementation measures beyond factors known to be associated with care quality (staff turnover rates, for profit-status, region, case mix, and proportion of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups).

Study Design: In the Comparative Effectiveness Aim (Aim 1), we will conduct a pragmatic, cluster randomized crossover trial in 42 SNFs comparing the effectiveness of a Bone Health Service Model, a Deprescribing Care Model, or an Injury Prevention Service Model, all delivered remotely by a post-fracture nurse consultant supported by an interprofessional team. Every SNF will receive 6 months of each care model in random sequence. Follow-up for delivery of the care models will begin on the date that the first eligible patient from the facility is included in the study. All patients with osteoporotic (OP) fracture admitted to the SNF within the intervention time period will receive the full designated care model, even if their stay in the SNF extends into the next intervention period. One primary post-fracture nurse consultant will be assigned to each facility for the life of the study. To prevent contamination between models, the nurse consultant will double check the care model assigned before every patient/proxy encounter. Medication utilization (measured using EHR data) will be assessed at discharge and 90 days after SNF admission date, and Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) (measured via survey) will be assessed at 90 days after SNF admission date, regardless of whether they have discharged home or remain in the SNF. We will therefore be able to compare the effectiveness of the models on important PROs, osteoporosis treatment rates, and FRID medication burden. Patients will be followed for injurious falls and fractures using administrative data and self-report during post-fracture nurse consultant calls until the end of the study period (up to 3 years, mean 2 years) censoring at death.

In the Overall Effectiveness Aim, we will compare rates of injurious falls and fractures for patients treated with the Deprescribing Care Model, Bone Health Service Model, or Injury Prevention Service Model to patients treated in 168 matched concurrent control SNFs, identified through the Long Term Care Data Cooperative. No new data will be collected for this aim.

In the Implementation Evaluation Aim, we will identify facility characteristics associated with high levels of intervention implementation. This aim will require the collection of surveys from facility leadership.

02

Conditions studied

  • Accidental Falls/Prevention and Control
  • Osteoporosis

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Osteoporosis
  • Deprescribing
  • Falls
  • Skilled Nursing Facilities
03

In context

Osteoporosis

1,640 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoporosis; 212 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 3,780 is above the median of 95 across 1,133 interventional studies indexed under Osteoporosis.

Browse Osteoporosis studies →

Lead sponsor

Duke University is the lead sponsor of 2,025 studies on the registry; 275 are open to participants now.

Of its 194 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 159 (82%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
65 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Aged 65 years or greater
  • Admitted to an enrolled SNF after hospitalized fracture
  • Completion of a medication optimization plan

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-osteoporotic fracture (e.g. facial, digital, skull, at site of tumor or infection)
  • Eligible for Hospice or palliative care
  • Patient discharged or died prior to completion of a medication optimization plan
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
3,780 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Deprescribing Care Model

    In this pragmatic, cluster randomized crossover trial 42 Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF) will each receive 6 months of each care model in random sequence. All patients with OP fracture admitted to the SNF within the intervention time period will receive the full designated care model, even if their stay in the SNF extends into the next intervention period.

    Other: Deprescribing Care Model

  • Active comparator
    Bone Heath Service Model

    In this pragmatic, cluster randomized crossover trial 42 Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF) will each receive 6 months of each care model in random sequence. All patients with OP fracture admitted to the SNF within the intervention time period will receive the full designated care model, even if their stay in the SNF extends into the next intervention period.

    Other: Bone Health Service Model

  • Active comparator
    Injury Prevention Service Model

    In this pragmatic, cluster randomized crossover trial 42 Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF) will each receive 6 months of each care model in random sequence. All patients with OP fracture admitted to the SNF within the intervention time period will receive the full designated care model, even if their stay in the SNF extends into the next intervention period.

    Other: Injury Prevention Service Model

Interventions

  • OtherDeprescribing Care Model

    The Deprescribing Care Model is designed to deprescribe fall related medications (FRIDs)

  • OtherBone Health Service Model

    The Bone Health Service Model is designed to provide osteoporosis evaluation and management

  • OtherInjury Prevention Service Model

    The Injury Prevention Service Model provides both the Deprescribing Care Model and the Bone Health Service Model.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Injurious falls

    Composite outcome of unique claims for emergency department, urgent care, or hospital visit for injurious fall or any fracture during follow-up (up to 3 years) (ICD 10 codes); to ensure complete ascertainment for participants with Medicare Advantage, researchers will also collect via self-report/proxy report at telephone calls 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 months, and 24 months following discharge from the SNF.

    Time frame: Up to 3 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of patients who initiate treatment for osteoporosis

    Osteoporosis treatment (process outcome)

    Time frame: 1 day of discharge from SNF and one year

  2. Medication Possession Ratio during follow-up, as measured by EHR and Medicare claims

    Osteoporosis treatment adherence (process outcome)

    Time frame: Up to 3 years

  3. Number of patients who had deprescribing ordered

    Fall-risk increasing drug (FRID) use (process outcome)

    Time frame: 1 day of discharge from SNF and 90 days after SNF admission date

  4. Modified Drug Burden Index during follow-up, as measured by EHR and Medicare claims

    Fall-risk increasing drug (FRID) use (process outcome)

    Time frame: Up to 3 years

  5. Patient medication side effect burden, measured via Living with Medicines Questionnaire (LMQ3).

    The LMQ3 is a validated self-report questionnaire. Medication side effect burden is measured via composite scores ranging from: No burden at all (41-73); Minimal burden (74-106); Moderate burden (107-139); High burden (140-172); and Extremely high burden (173-205), as well as a visual analog scale with scores ranging from: no burden at all (0.0- 2.0); minimal burden (2.1 -4.0); moderate (4.1-5.9); high burden (6.0-7.9); extremely high burden (8.0-10.0).

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

  6. Patient falls self-efficacy (i.e. fear of falling), measured via Falls Efficacy Scale

    The Falls Efficacy Scale is a validated self-report questionnaire. Scores range from 10-100. A total score of greater than 70 indicates that the person has a fear of falling.

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

  7. Patient pain, measured via Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference Short Form

    The Pain Interference Short Form is a validated self-report questionnaire. Each item on the measure is rated on a 5-point scale (1=not at all; 2=a little bit; 3=somewhat; 4=quite a bit; and 5=very much) with a range in score from 6 to 30 with higher scores indicating a greater degree of pain interference.

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

  8. Patient depression, measured via Patient Health Questionnaire survey (PHQ-8)

    The PHQ-8 is a validated questionnaire for assessing the severity of depression symptoms.The score for each item is calculated by assigning scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3, to the response categories of: not at all, several days, more than half the days, and nearly every day, respectively. Total score for the 8 items ranges from 0 to 24. Scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 represent cutpoints for mild, moderate, moderately severe and severe depression, respectively.

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

  9. Patient anxiety, measured via PROMIS anxiety short form survey

    The PROMIS anxiety short form survey is a validated self-report questionnaire. Each item on the measure is rated on a 5-point scale (1=never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often; and 5=always) with a range in score from 7 to 35 with higher scores indicating greater severity of anxiety.

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

  10. Patient sleep, measured via PROMIS sleep disturbance short form

    The PROMIS sleep disturbance short form is a validated self-report questionnaire. Each item on the measure is rated on a 5-point scale (1=never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often; and 5=always) with a range in score from 8 to 40 with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep disturbance.

    Time frame: 90 days after SNF admission date

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife
    Boston, Massachusetts 02131, United States
  • Duke University School of Medicine
    Durham, North Carolina 27710, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Berry SD, Toles M, Travison TG, McConnell ES, Zullo AR, Little MO, Gwyther L, McDermott C, Lee R, Cary M, Syme M, Kissam S, Hecker E, MacLean KG, Colon-Emeric C. PReventing Injury in Skilled nursing facilities through optimizing Medications (PRISM), a protocol for a cluster randomized trial to reduce injurious falls in post-acute care. Trials. 2025 Sep 26;26(1):367. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-09122-z. PubMed 41013714 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 16, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06304428
Lead sponsor
Duke University
Collaborators
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Hebrew SeniorLife, Brown University, The American Health Care Association, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 12, 2024
Start date
Sep 30, 2024
Primary completion
Jul 1, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Jul 1, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Jan 16, 2026

Study contacts

Cathleen S Colon-Emeric, MD, MHS
principal investigator · Duke University

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.

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