The overall goal of this protocol is to pilot test a clinician training intervention that uses standardized patients (trained actors playing patient roles) as instructors who impart communication skills to primary care clinicians. This project will conduct a pilot clinical trial of the intervention developed by the primary investigator in order to evaluate intervention feasibility and generate data to plan a subsequent fully-powered, multisite trial. Primary care clinicians will be randomized to receive either the intervention or control; 48 patients (2 per clinician) will then be recorded during clinic visits with study clinicians and will provide data on post-visit perceptions and health outcomes. Study hypotheses are that visits with clinicians who receive the intervention (versus control) will be associated with more frequent use of targeted communication skills, lower probability of high-risk opioid prescribing, higher patient-reported agreement with treatment plan, and lower pain interference 2 months later.
The only intervention in the randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be clinician education. This RCT will not directly manipulate or influence patient care. Therefore, this study is minimal risk. The only foreseeable patient risks relate to data confidentiality and privacy. The investigators will recruit approximately 48 primary care clinicians for the pilot RCT. The study goal is to enroll 24 residents and 48 patients (2 patient visits per resident). However, based on previous experience with similar recruitment methods in these clinics, only about 50% of enrolled clinicians will ultimately have visits with study patients. Thus, it will be necessary to over-enroll clinicians because the investigators expect a large proportion of residents will have to be dropped from study due to not seeing any study patients. After enrollment, clinicians will complete a brief questionnaire including demographics and self efficacy regarding communicating with patients about chronic pain and opioids. Randomization assignment will take place after all clinicians have provided informed consent and enrolled, to prevent randomization status from influencing enrollment decisions. Randomization assignment will be done by study personnel after all clinicians have been recruited. Randomization is at the clinician level. Because of the nature of the intervention, it is not possible to blind subjects or investigators to randomization assignment. However, patients will be unaware of clinicians' randomization assignment. Intervention clinicians will complete 2 standardized patient visits during regular clinic time. The first visit will include viewing an 8-10 minute video summarizing the key communication skills, a 10-12 minute roll-play session to practice using these skills, and 8-10 minutes of constructive feedback. The second video will have only roll-play and feedback. Control clinicians will receive a written summary of the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines which include recommendations for best practices for use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain. To the extent possible, the investigators will use CDC-produced materials for the control group. CDC guidelines will serve as an attention control. Intervention clinicians will complete a brief questionnaire evaluating the intervention. Some time later, enrolled clinicians will see 2 patients who've been screened and enrolled by the research team and who've agreed to allow a previously scheduled visit with pcp to be audio recorded. Data will include the audio recording transcripts, a pre-visit and post-visit patient questionnaire and a clinician post-visit questionnaire. 2 months after each patient's visit, a research assistant will call patients and obtain 2-month follow up data (e.g. Brief Pain Inventory).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
95
Intervention components include an 8-10 minute instructional video, a pocket card and pamphlet, and 2 standardized patient visits with role-play and feedback by the standardized patient
Physician will review materials based on CDC opioid prescribing guidelines.
patient with a scheduled visit with a clinician who received the communication training.
patient with a scheduled visit with a clinician who did not receive the communication training.
University of California Davis Family Medicine Clinic
Sacramento, California, United States
University of California Davis Internal Medicine Clinic
Sacramento, California, United States
Clinician Number of Targeted Behaviors Per Visit
Compare frequency of use of targeted communication behaviors observed per visit for residents in the Intervention vs Control arm (using coding of recorded visits to assess skill use). We first developed a list of targeted communication behaviors that were targeted by our intervention and based on our conceptual model. We developed a coding manual to count the number of unique behaviors in each study visit. We analyzed audio recordings and transcripts from all study visits to count the number of targeted behaviors per each visit. Multiple team members measured communication behaviors in each visit to ensure reliability of this measure.
Time frame: Over a 3-9 month period (depending on how soon after the intervention clinicians' appointments with patient participants can be scheduled).
Compare Efficacy of Control vs Intervention by Measuring Changes in the Way Pain Interfered With Patients Lives Using the Brief Pain Inventory - Pain Interference Subscale Survey
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Interference subscale consists of 7 categories relating to how pain interferes with patients' lives. Patients are asked to rate their pain on a zero (Does Not Interfere) to 10 (Completely Interferes) scale. The 7 categories are: 1. General Activity, 2. Mood, 3. Walking Ability, 4. Work, 5. Relationships, 6. Sleep, 7. Enjoyment of life. Results are averaged to give an overall interference rating from 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse pain.
Time frame: 8 weeks
Compare Efficacy of Control vs Intervention by Measuring Changes in the Severity of Patients Pain Using the Brief Pain Inventory - (Short Form) Pain Severity Subscale Which Measures the Severity of the Patient's Pain.
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Short Form -- Pain Severity subscale has 4 survey questions / categories, asking patients to rate the severity of their pain on a 0-10 scale (with 0 being No Pain and 10 being Worst Possible Pain). The 4 Categories are, A. At it's worst in the last 24 hours, B. At it's best in the last 24 hours, C. Pain on average, D. Pain right now. Results are averaged to give an overall score (0-10) with higher scores indicating worse outcomes.
Time frame: 8 weeks
Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire
Comparison of difficult doctor-patient encounter scale for Intervention vs Control physicians. Difficult doctor-patient relationship scale has 10 items scored from 1-6. The overall scale range is 10-60, with higher values indicating more difficult (worse) visits. Physicians complete this measure for each study patient.
Time frame: Over a 3-9 month period (depending on how soon after the intervention clinicians' appointments with patient participants can be scheduled).
Patient Experience Score
Patient experience score for patients who saw Intervention and Control physicians, measured by post visit patient agreement with treatment plan, patient trust, and patient assessment of clinician communication skills. Patient experience is a standardized composite average of three validated scales: Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Adult Visit Survey communication subscale, range 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating better communication. Patient Agreement with Treatment Plan Scale, range 3 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater agreement. Brief Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale, range 5 to 25, with higher scores indicating greater trust. The three scales were standardized and averaged into a single composite score. The theoretical composite score ranges from -4.5 to 0.6, with higher scores indicating a better patient experience. Results are reported separately for each study arm as mean (standard deviation).
Time frame: 8 weeks
Physicians' Overall Appraisal of the Standardized Patient Intervention
Physician reported assessment of intervention. Investigators will ask for physicians' evaluation of the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of the intervention. Investigators will offer 10 value statements about the intervention. Physicians will select 1 from the following choices: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree. Results will be reported as the percentage who agree or strongly agree with each statement.
Time frame: 1-3 months
Physician Communication Self-efficacy
Physician self-efficacy for communication skills for Intervention vs Control physicians. These questions ask about physicians' confidence related to managing chronic non-cancer pain in primary care. Physicians will be asked to rate how strongly they agree or disagree with 8 statements (each on 1-5 scale. Higher values indicate greater (better) self-efficacy. Baseline and post-visit ratings of self efficacy will be computed, and we will measure change in self efficacy (post-visit self efficacy minus baseline self efficacy) for Control vs Intervention physicians. Overall score range will be 1-5, with higher numbers indicating better self efficacy.
Time frame: Over 3-9 month period (depending on how soon after the intervention clinicians' appointments with patient participants can be scheduled).
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.