Investigators will determine whether N-of-1 trials, as a pragmatic, participant-centered approach to medication optimization that can overcome key barriers of deprescribing, can lead to increased participant confidence regarding their preference to continue or discontinue beta-blockers in older adults with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF).
This is an unblinded NIH Stage I of Behavioral Intervention Development trial, using serial multiple-period single participant crossover design. Investigators will enroll 20 participants, conducting an N-of-1 trial in each. The intervention is a two-arm crossover withdrawal/reversal design (On \[A\] vs. Off \[B\]) with up to 6 periods, each period lasting up to 6 weeks. The sequence of treatment will be randomized to either ABAB or BABA. Each participant will have the option to participate in additional (no more than 6) periods if they wish to gather more data. The intervention drug will be beta-blockers, previously prescribed to the participants by their physician. The investigators have developed a titration algorithm, where during the On period (A), participants will be on their baseline beta-blocker dose (or the highest dose they can safely tolerate). During the Off period (B), their beta-blockers will be down-titrated and subsequently discontinued (or at the lowest dose they can safely tolerate); we will decrease the dose of the beta-blocker by 50% every week regardless of which beta-blocker they are on. When returning to On, from Off, we will up-titrate by 50% until reaching their home dose (or the highest dose they can safely tolerate).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
20
The intervention is a two-arm crossover withdrawal/reversal design (On \[A\] vs Off \[B\]) with up to 6 periods, each period lasting up to 6 weeks. During the On period (A), participants will be on their home beta-blocker (or highest tolerable) dose. During the Off period (B), their beta blockers will be down-titrated and subsequently discontinued (or the lowest tolerable dose). Participants will be randomized into either ABAB or BABA sequences. Other names: acebutolol, atenolol, betaxolol, bisoprolol, carvedilol, labetalol, metoprolol, metoprolol succinate, metoprolol tartrate, nadolol, nebivolol, propranolol, penbutolol, pindolol, propranolol
The intervention is a two-arm crossover withdrawal/reversal design (On \[A\] vs Off \[B\]) with up to 6 periods, each period lasting up to 6 weeks. During the On period (A), participants will be on their home beta-blocker (or highest tolerable) dose. During the Off period (B), their beta blockers will be down-titrated and subsequently discontinued (or the lowest tolerable dose). Participants will be randomized into either ABAB or BABA sequences. Other names: acebutolol, atenolol, betaxolol, bisoprolol, carvedilol, labetalol, metoprolol, metoprolol succinate, metoprolol tartrate, nadolol, nebivolol, propranolol, penbutolol, pindolol, propranolol
Weill Cornell Medicine
New York, New York, United States
Change in participant's confidence regarding their preference to continue or discontinue beta-blocker, as assessed by qualitative interviews
Qualitative interviews will be conducted to assess the change in confidence through their experience participating in N-of-1 trials. Directed content analysis methods will be used to develop relevant categories and themes from interview transcript data. Transcripts will be coded and analyzed by two team members, consulting additional members to establish consensus where needed. Inter-rater reliability between coders will be established using Cohen's Kappa score.
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit to the date of their last follow-up interview, assessed up to 88 weeks.
Change in participant decision-confidence, as measured by the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS)
Measures participant perceptions of uncertainty in decision-making, factors contributing to uncertainty, and effective decision-making. A set of 16 questions with responses ranging from "strongly agree" = (0) to "strongly disagree" = (4). Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 and 100. Lower scores indicate feeling informed and low decisional conflict whereas higher scores indicate feelings of uncertainty and high decisional conflict.
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Features of a feasible and pragmatic protocol for deprescribing N-of-1 trials in participants with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction, as measured by qualitative interviews.
Qualitative interviews will be conducted to assess the feasibility and acceptability of participant-facing materials and themes related to N-of-1 trials, and their experience participating in them, at each of the following time points. Directed content analysis methods will be used to develop relevant categories and themes from interview transcript data. Transcripts will be coded and analyzed by two team members, consulting additional members to establish consensus where needed. Inter-rater reliability between coders will be established using Cohen's Kappa score.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit to the date of their last follow-up interview, assessed up to 88 weeks.
Change in participants feeling informed through an N-of-1 protocol, as measured by the Decisional Conflict sub-scale
A set of 3 items within the Decisional Conflict Scale assessing participant's sense of knowing the options available to them and their benefits. Answers range from "strongly agree" = (0) to "strongly disagree" = (4). Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 (feels extremely informed) and 100 (feels extremely uninformed).
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Change in participants feeling uncertainty through an N-of-1 protocol, as measured by the Decisional Conflict sub-scale
A set of 3 items within the Decisional Conflict Scale assessing how sure participants feel about making a given decision. Answers range from "strongly agree" = (0) to "strongly disagree" = (4). Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 (feels extremely certain about best choice) and 100 (feels extremely uncertain about best choice).
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Change in participants feeling supported through an N-of-1 protocol, as measured by the Decisional Conflict sub-scale
A set of 3 items within the Decisional Conflict Scale assessing if participant's feel supported or pressured by others when making a given decision. Answers range from "strongly agree" = (0) to "strongly disagree" = (4). Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 (feels extremely supported in decision making) and 100 (feels extremely unsupported in decision making).
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Change in participants decision effectiveness through an N-of-1 protocol, as measured by the Decisional Conflict sub-scale
A set of 4 items within the Decisional Conflict Scale assessing if participants feel satisfied and informed in their decision making. Answers range from "strongly agree" = (0) to "strongly disagree" = (4). Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 (good decision) and 100 (bad decision).
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Change in shared decision making through an N-of-1 protocol, as measured by the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire
Measures participants feeling of inclusion during the decision-making process of their treatment options. The 9-item questionnaire asks participants to respond to statements with answers to the questions ranging from "completely disagree" to "completely agree". Responses range from (0) = "completely disagree" to (5) = "completely agree" and are scored on a six-point Likert scale. Scores are summed together to produce an overall score between 0 (low involvement and 45 (high involvement).
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.
Change in participant activation through an N-of-1 protocol, as assessed by the Patient Activation Measure (PAM)
Assesses an individual's knowledge, skills and confidence integral to managing one's own health and healthcare. Participants respond to a set of statements with answers ranging from "disagree strongly," "disagree," "agree," "strongly agree," and "not applicable." The responses are quantified to produce a score ranging from 0 to 100, and respondents fall into one of four levels of participant activation: Disengaged \& Overwhelmed, Becoming Aware but still Struggling, Taking Action \& Gaining Control, and Maintaining Behaviors \& Pushing Further. A score of 0 (Disengaged \& Overwhelmed) indicates low participant activation, participant is passive with low healthcare knowledge and adherence. A score of 100 (Maintaining Behaviors \& Pushing Further) indicates high participant activation, with active maintenance of a healthy lifestyle.
Time frame: From the date of their baseline visit, to the date of their end of intervention visit, assessed up to 36 weeks.