Contraception Clinical Trial
Official title:
Patient-Centered Support for Contraceptive Decision-Making: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of a Contraceptive Decision Support Tool
NCT number | NCT02078713 |
Other study ID # | CE-1304-6874 |
Secondary ID | |
Status | Completed |
Phase | N/A |
First received | |
Last updated | |
Start date | October 2014 |
Est. completion date | October 2016 |
Verified date | April 2018 |
Source | University of California, San Francisco |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
The investigators have designed a tablet-based decision support tool to help women learn more
about their birth control options and support them in choosing a method they are happy with.
The investigators will test whether the decision support tool helps women choose a birth
control method they can continue using successfully by having some women use the tool before
their birth control-related visit to a health care provider, and some women not use the tool
before their visit. The investigators will then follow up with all the women at four months
and seven months after their visit to see if they are still using the birth control method
they chose at the visit and how happy they are with the method.
Hypotheses:
1. Women who use the contraceptive decision support tool will be more likely to continue
using their chosen method at 4 and 7 months follow-up, compared to women who receive
usual care.
2. The contraceptive decision support tool will increase women's knowledge, choice of, and
use of highly effective reversible contraception, compared to usual care.
3. The contraceptive decision support tool will decrease decision conflict, compared to
usual care.
4. The contraceptive decision support tool will increase patient satisfaction with the
clinic visit and with their method, compared to usual care.
5. Women who use the contraceptive decision support tool will have fewer unintended
pregnancies during the follow-up period, compared to women who received usual care.
6. The contraceptive decision support tool will increase shared patient-provider decision
making in contraceptive counseling visits, compared to usual care.
7. The contraceptive decision support tool will decrease provider frustration when
providing contraceptive counseling and increase provider job satisfaction.
8. Women using the tool will be more likely to report use of any moderately or highly
effective method of contraception at 4 and 7 months follow-up, compared to women not
using the tool.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 786 |
Est. completion date | October 2016 |
Est. primary completion date | October 2016 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | Accepts Healthy Volunteers |
Gender | Female |
Age group | 15 Years to 45 Years |
Eligibility |
Inclusion Criteria: Patients - Women of reproductive age (15-45) - Wish to discuss starting or changing a contraceptive method during their visit - Speak, read, and understand English or Spanish (Note: for the pre- and post-intervention audio recording phases, only patients who can speak, read, and understand English easily will be enrolled.) - History of sexual activity with men Providers - Provide contraceptive counseling in one of the participating clinics - Plan to remain in job role for at least six months Clinic staff - Work at one of the participating clinics - Had a job that included patient contact, but did not solely consist of family planning counseling at the time of the implementation of the intervention Exclusion Criteria: Patients - Previously enrolled in the study - Previously used the decision support tool at the Women's Community Clinic in San Francisco - Are unable to get pregnant - Appointment reason is for insertion of IUD or contraceptive implant - Currently pregnant - Desire pregnancy currently or in the next seven months (Note: The last criterion is designed to ensure we will have limited numbers of women that will discontinue their contraceptive methods during the study due to planning a pregnancy.) |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
United States | City College of San Francisco Student Health Services | San Francisco | California |
United States | Planned Parenthood San Francisco Health Center | San Francisco | California |
United States | San Francisco City Clinic | San Francisco | California |
United States | San Francisco General Hospital Family Planning Clinic | San Francisco | California |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University of California, San Francisco | Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute |
United States,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Other | Choice of a Highly Effective Method of Contraception at Baseline | Patient report of whether or not patient chose highly effective method at baseline. Highly effective methods include implants, IUDs, and male and female sterilization. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Other | Use of a Highly Effective Method of Contraception at 4 and 7 Months Follow-up. | Whether patient is using a highly effective contraceptive method at 4 and 7 month follow-up survey. Highly effective methods include implant, IUDs, and male and female sterilization. | 4 and 7 months post-enrollment | |
Other | Use of Any Moderately or Highly Effective Method of Contraception at 4 and 7 Months Follow-up | Patient report of whether or not patient is using a highly or moderately effective contraceptive method at 4 and 7 month follow-up survey. As defined by the Centers for Disease Control, moderately effective methods include injectables, pills, patch, vaginal ring, and diaphragm; typical failure rates range from 6-12%. Highly effective methods include implants, IUDs, and male and female sterilization; failure rates are less than 1%. | 4 and 7 months post-enrollment | |
Other | Unplanned Pregnancy | Incidence of unplanned pregnancy among study participants, as determined by responses of patients who experienced a pregnancy to the 6-item London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy. The London Measure includes items on attitude towards an experienced pregnancy and behaviors before pregnancy to determine the intendedness of pregnancy. The score range of the London Measure is 0-12, with a score of <10 indicating unplanned pregnancy and a score of 10 or higher indicating planned pregnancy. We report the percentage of patients who report a pregnancy and report a score of <10 on the London Measure. | 4 months and 7 months from enrollment | |
Primary | Contraceptive Continuation | Whether or not a participant is still using the contraceptive method she selected at baseline. | 4 and 7 months post-enrollment | |
Secondary | Patient Contraceptive Counseling Satisfaction | Patient-reported score on an 11-item factor analysis-validated measure created by the PI to assess patients' satisfaction with the contraceptive counseling experience. The measure consists of 5-point Likert scale items on which patients evaluate provider performance, with item response options ranging from 1 ("Poor") to 5 ("Excellent"). The score range for the total measure is11-55, with 11 as the worst possible score and 55 as the best possible score for provider performance. Analyzed dichotomously, top score (55) versus all lower scores. | Baseline, post-visit survey | |
Secondary | Patient Satisfaction With Information Received About Side Effects During Counseling | Patient response to a 5-point Likert scale item about satisfaction with information that their provider gave them about side effects of their chosen methods during their baseline visit (1=completely unsatisfied, 5=completely satisfied). Analyzed dichotomously as top score of 5 versus <5. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Overall Satisfaction With Visit | Patient report on 5-point Likert scale of satisfaction with baseline visit (1=completely unsatisfied, 5=completely satisfied). Analyzed dichotomously as top score of 5 versus <5. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Shared Decision Making - Feelings About Provider Involvement | Patient report on 3-point scale of their feelings about provider involvement in contraceptive decision-making: I wish provider had been less involved, provider was involved the right amount, I wiss provider had been more involved. | Baseline (post-visit) and up to 24 months | |
Secondary | Shared Decision Making - Provider Appropriately Expressed Preference | Patient report of attitude on 3-point scale on how provider expressed preference for contraceptive method choice: Right amount, wish less strongly, wish more strongly. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Shared Decision Making - Satisfaction With How Provider Helped With Choice | Patient report of satisfaction on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1=completely unsatisfied to 5=completely satisfied) of how the provider helped contraceptive method choice. Analyzed dichotomously as top score of 5 versus <5. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Shared Decision Making - Who Made the Decision? | Patient response to 5-point scale of who made decision on contraceptive method. The original 5 points were the provider by themselves, more provider, both equally, more patient, or provider by themselves. In analysis, these options were collapsed to three points: more provider, both equally, or more patient. | Baseline (post-visit) | |
Secondary | Shared Decision Making - Provider Preference | Patient report of whether or not provider had preference for contraceptive method choice, reported on a 5-point scale: no preference, slight preference, moderate preference, strong preference, extremely strong preference. Analyzed dichotomously as any preference versus no preference. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Patient Decisional Conflict in Contraceptive Choice | Patient Decisional Conflict was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), a validated measure to assess patients' decisional conflict in medical decision making. The DCS includes 16 items about experience of conflict, with 5-point Likert response options ranging from 0 ("Strongly disagree") to 4 ("Strongly agree"). Higher scores indicate less conflict. Top score on DCS (Range: 0-100, analyzed dichotomously as 100 versus <100). Top scores on subscales also analyzed (Informed decision, Uncertainty, Effective decision, Values clarity, Support, all ranging 0-100 and analyzed dichotomously as 100 versus <100). | Baseline (post-visit) | |
Secondary | Patient Knowledge of Contraceptive Options and Features | Patient responses to items derived from National Survey of Reproductive Contraceptive Knowledge and previous studies of contraceptive knowledge and attitudes. All items analyzed as correct vs. incorrect. | Baseline (post-visit) | |
Secondary | Patient Chosen Contraceptive Method Satisfaction | 5-point Likert scale item regarding patient satisfaction with contraceptive method chosen at baseline visit. The item is a statement of method satisfaction, and response options range from 1 ("Completely disagree") to 5 ("Completely agree"). A higher score indicates higher satisfaction. Analyzed dichotomously as top score (5) versus all lower scores. | Reported and analyzed at baseline (post-visit), 4 months and 7 months follow-up | |
Secondary | Patient Current Contraceptive Method Satisfaction | 5-point Likert scale question regarding patient satisfaction with the contraceptive method they are currently using. The item is a statement of method satisfaction, and response options range from 1 ("Completely disagree") to 5 ("Completely agree"). A higher score indicates higher satisfaction. Analyzed dichotomously as top score of 5 versus <5. | 7 months follow-up | |
Secondary | Patient Attitude Towards Use of Contraceptive Options | Patient ratings of contraceptive methods on the 11-point Global Contraceptive Attitude scale, developed by the PI. To assess overall (or "global") attitude towards use of various methods, patients are asked to respond the following with regard to each method listed in the data table: "Overall, how would you rate each of the following as a birth control method for yourself, (even if you've never used it)?" Response options range from 0 ("Terrible method") to 10 ("Great method"). A higher score on an individual item indicates a more positive attitude towards a method. Analyzed as discrete items with responses of 0 to 10; item scores not combined into an overall scale score. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Newly Heard About Methods During Visit | Percentage of patients who reported having heard about a method in the post-survey, but not the pre-survey. | Baseline (pre- and post-survey) | |
Secondary | Patient Rating of Visit as "Much Better" Than Previous Family Planning Visit | Patient report on 5-point Likert scale question asking patient to compare this visit to last family planning visit (1=Today was much worse; 5=today was much better). Analyzed dichotomously as top score of 5 versus <5. | Baseline (post-visit survey) | |
Secondary | Total Clinic Visit Time | Total amount of time a patient spends in a clinic for a family planning visit, from check-in to check-out. | Baseline visit | |
Secondary | Time Spent With Contraceptive Counseling Provider | Total amount of time spent with the provider that is providing contraceptive counseling. | Baseline visit | |
Secondary | Maslach Burnout Inventory | Provider participants were asked to respond to the Maslach Burnout Inventory on workplace burnout among human services workers. The scale includes 22 items with response options on a Likert scale of 0-6. Individual scores were calculated at both baseline and follow-up for three subscales: emotional exhaustion (Range: 0-54, with higher score representing higher emotional exhaustion), depersonalization (Range: 0-30, with a higher score representing higher depersonalization), and personal accomplishment (Range: 0-48, with a higher score representing more personal accomplishment in the workplace). | Change between baseline and end of study (up to 24 months post-enrollment). In multivariate analysis, follow-up score analyzed controlling for site and score at baseline (Analyses 1-3). |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT02577601 -
Impact of Combined Hormonal Contraceptives on UPA
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT03153644 -
Improving Contraceptive Care for Women With Medical Conditions
|
||
Completed |
NCT04112095 -
Adherence With Continuous-dose Oral Contraceptive: Evaluation of Self-Selection and Use
|
Phase 3 | |
Recruiting |
NCT05521646 -
Implementing Best Practice Postpartum Contraceptive Services Through a Quality Improvement Initiative
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT04291001 -
Ovarian Function With ENG Implant and UPA Use
|
Early Phase 1 | |
Completed |
NCT04568980 -
Assessment of Contraceptive Safety and Effectiveness in Cystic Fibrosis
|
||
Completed |
NCT03438682 -
Real World Effectiveness and Safety of Hysteroscopic (Essure®) Compared to Laparoscopic Sterilization
|
||
Active, not recruiting |
NCT01948882 -
Evaluation of Safety and Effectiveness of the Essure (Model ESS505) Device to Prevent Pregnancy in Women
|
N/A | |
Enrolling by invitation |
NCT04997499 -
Adolescent Subcutaneous (SQ) Injection Video Validation
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03589040 -
Darunavir and Rilpivirine Interactions With Etonogestrel Contraceptive Implant
|
Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT04463680 -
Rifampin and the Contraceptive Implant
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT03154125 -
Sayana® Press Extension Study
|
Phase 3 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT03725358 -
A Cluster-RCT to Increase the Uptake of LARCs Among Adolescent Females and Young Women in Cameroon.
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02957630 -
"E4/DRSP Endocrine Function, Metabolic Control and Hemostasis Study"
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT02718222 -
Impact and Performance of Institutionalizing Immediate Post-partum IUD Services
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02456584 -
Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics Study of Existing DMPA Contraceptive Methods
|
Phase 1 | |
Recruiting |
NCT02121067 -
LNG-IUS at 2 Weeks Postpartum
|
Phase 4 | |
Terminated |
NCT02169869 -
Immediate Postplacental IUD Insertion
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT02292056 -
Medication Safety and Contraceptive Counseling for Reproductive Aged Women With Psychiatric Conditions
|
N/A | |
Withdrawn |
NCT01930994 -
Kenya Sino-implant (II) PK Study
|
N/A |