Effect and Cost Effectiveness of a Dyadic Empowerment-based Heart Failure Management Program for Self-care

Heart Failure Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Effects and Cost-effectiveness of a Dyadic Empowerment-based Heart Failure Management Program (De-HF) on Self-care, HRQL and Hospital Readmission: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT05806606
• Other study ID #: DE-HF
• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: April 17, 2023
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2026

Study information

• Verified date: June 2024
• Source: The University of Hong Kong
• Contact: Doris Sau Fung YU, PhD
• Phone: 39176319
• Email: dyu1[@]hku.hk
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Global population aging has drastically increased healthcare spending worldwide, with the greatest portion going to hospital and community health services. Heart failure (HF), as the final form of many cardiovascular diseases resulting from insufficient myocardial pumping. Ineffective self-care is consistently identified as the major modifiable risk factor for HF decompensation requiring hospitalization. It refers to an active cognitive process that influence patients' engagement in self-care maintenance, symptom perception and self-care management. However, current studies pay much focus on interventions such as motivational interviewing and behavioural activation to enhance the HF-related self-care and health outcomes which only produces short-term benefits. In fact, the lack of a sustainable effect from the self-care supportive interventions might be related the use of patient-centric design in these studies, which totally ignores the fact that HF management takes place in a dyadic context. To advance, active strategies were adopted to mobilize collaborative effort of the dyad in actual disease management.

This study aims to evaluate the effects and cost-effectiveness of a Dyadic empowerment-based Heart Failure Management Program (De-HF) for self-care, health outcomes, and health service utilization among HF patients who require family support after hospital discharge. The De-HF program is based on the Theory of Dyadic Illness Management to enhance the congruence in illness perception and active dyadic collaboration in managing HF via both face-to-face and online platforms.

Description:

This is a mixed-method RCT to evaluate the effects and cost-effectiveness of the Dyadic Empowerment Heart Failure Program on improving self-care, health-related quality of life, hospital readmission and emergency room utilization among the HF patients discharged from the hospital. The study will be conducted in two regional hospital in Hong Kong, with subjects to be recruited from the in-patient setting. They need to have an index diagnosis of HF in admission, at New York Heart Association Classification Class II-IV, to be discharged home and with Abbreviated Mental Test score >6. The caregiver need to the primary caregivers, co-residing with the patients, and have access to smartphone. Power analysis estimate the sample size as 226 care dyads who will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive the DE-HF Program of the education intervention. The 16-week De-HF program will be commenced within 2 weeks of discharge. It will starts with a dyadic interview in a home visit to identify the usual pattern of collaboration, deficits, strengths and competing concerns in disease management. This is followed by five empowerment modules with the purpose to help the care dyads to get a consensus and optimize their joint efforts in disease management. The five topics include symptom management, dietary and fluid modification, medication management, symptom management, activity and exercise. For each module, there are two sessions for i) perception and cognitive empowerment and ii) develop collaborative goal attainment process. Upon the completion of the ten sessions, two bi-weekly telephone calls will be made to the care dyads to monitor their level of goal attainment, and to give further advice and counselling. The 16-week dyadic education program will cover one home visit to assess their disease management at home, and this will be followed by five standard bi-weekly online education session on the same topics as the modules in the De-HF program. Outcome evaluation will take place at baseline, post-test, 24th week and 32rd week with validated measure.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Recruiting
• Enrollment: 226
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2026
• Est. primary completion date: April 1, 2025
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 55 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Aged 55 or over

• Confirmed medical diagnosis of Heart Failure by a cardiologist of at least 6 months

• New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II-IV symptoms

• Discharged home after an admission to the recruitment setting

• Carer co-residing with the patients in the same household

• Carer self-identified as the primary carer for the patients

• Both the patient and the carer having adequate cognitive ability (as indicated by an Abbreviated Test Score of >6)

• Have at least one Smartphone or device to access the online meetings and videos

Exclusion Criteria:

• Not living with primary caregiver

• With end-stage renal disease relying on hemodialysis rather than HF medications to regulate fluid volume.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Disease Management
• Empowerment
• Heart Failure
• Self Care
• Transitional Care

Intervention

Other:
• Dyadic empowerment based heart failure management program
The 16-week De-HF Program is delivered on a dyadic basis, The program consists of three core elements: i) joint dyadic interview in a home visit (1st-2nd week), ii) five ICT-enhanced empowerment-based modules (3rd-12th week; 2 sessions/ each module), and iii) post-module telephone follow-up (13th-16th week). The overall aim of the dyadic interview is to understand their usual pattern of collaboration, deficits, strengths and competing concerns in disease management. This is followed by the empowerment modules with the purpose to help the care dyads to get a consensus in disease interpretation (1st session: Perceptual and Cognitive Empowerment Session) and develop collaborative goal attainment process (2nd Session: Collaborative Gaol-Setting Process). This will be followed by two bi-weekly telephone calls to the care dyads using a speaker phone to monitor their level of goal attainment for the five modules, and to give further advice and counselling.
• Dyadic education program
The 16-week HF education program comprises a home visit, five bi-weekly online training sessions, and the subsequent telephone follow-up for the care dyads. The nurse will first assess how they manage HF in terms of medication compliance, fluid and dietary control, symptom monitoring and responses in a home visit and clarify their major misconceptions in self-care. This will be followed by five bi-weekly online education sessions on the same topics as the empowerment modules in the De-HF program.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Hong Kong	Department of Medicine, Tseung Kwan O Hospital	Hong Kong

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
The University of Hong Kong	Hospital Authority, Hong Kong

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Hong Kong, 

References & Publications (24)

Boczor S, Daubmann A, Eisele M, Blozik E, Scherer M. Quality of life assessment in patients with heart failure: validity of the German version of the generic EQ-5D-5L. BMC Public Health. 2019 Nov 6;19(1):1464. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7623-2. — View Citation

Buck HG, Harkness K, Wion R, Carroll SL, Cosman T, Kaasalainen S, Kryworuchko J, McGillion M, O'Keefe-McCarthy S, Sherifali D, Strachan PH, Arthur HM. Caregivers' contributions to heart failure self-care: a systematic review. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015 F — View Citation

Buck HG, Stromberg A, Chung ML, Donovan KA, Harkness K, Howard AM, Kato N, Polo R, Evangelista LS. A systematic review of heart failure dyadic self-care interventions focusing on intervention components, contexts, and outcomes. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Jan;7 — View Citation

Chen S, Zheng S, Wang X, Zhang X, Fa T, Fu L, Zang X, Zhao Y. Linguistic and Psychometric Validation of the Chinese Version of the Control Attitudes Scale-Revised in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021 Jul-Aug 01;36(4):349-356. do — View Citation

Clark AM, Spaling M, Harkness K, Spiers J, Strachan PH, Thompson DR, Currie K. Determinants of effective heart failure self-care: a systematic review of patients' and caregivers' perceptions. Heart. 2014 May;100(9):716-21. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-30485 — View Citation

Groenewegen A, Rutten FH, Mosterd A, Hoes AW. Epidemiology of heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020 Aug;22(8):1342-1356. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.1858. Epub 2020 Jun 1. — View Citation

Ho CC, Clochesy JM, Madigan E, Liu CC. Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Nurs Res. 2007 Nov-Dec;56(6):441-8. doi: 10.1097/01.NNR.0000299849.21935.c4. — View Citation

Jaarsma T, Hill L, Bayes-Genis A, La Rocca HB, Castiello T, Celutkiene J, Marques-Sule E, Plymen CM, Piper SE, Riegel B, Rutten FH, Ben Gal T, Bauersachs J, Coats AJS, Chioncel O, Lopatin Y, Lund LH, Lainscak M, Moura B, Mullens W, Piepoli MF, Rosano G, S — View Citation

Jonkman NH, Westland H, Groenwold RH, Agren S, Atienza F, Blue L, Bruggink-Andre de la Porte PW, DeWalt DA, Hebert PL, Heisler M, Jaarsma T, Kempen GI, Leventhal ME, Lok DJ, Martensson J, Muniz J, Otsu H, Peters-Klimm F, Rich MW, Riegel B, Stromberg A, Ts — View Citation

Lyons KS, Lee CS. The Theory of Dyadic Illness Management. J Fam Nurs. 2018 Feb;24(1):8-28. doi: 10.1177/1074840717745669. Epub 2018 Jan 20. — View Citation

Rahmani A, Vahedian-Azimi A, Sirati-Nir M, Norouzadeh R, Rozdar H, Sahebkar A. The Effect of the Teach-Back Method on Knowledge, Performance, Readmission, and Quality of Life in Heart Failure Patients. Cardiol Res Pract. 2020 Nov 23;2020:8897881. doi: 10. — View Citation

Riegel B, Barbaranelli C, Carlson B, Sethares KA, Daus M, Moser DK, Miller J, Osokpo OH, Lee S, Brown S, Vellone E. Psychometric Testing of the Revised Self-Care of Heart Failure Index. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2019 Mar/Apr;34(2):183-192. doi: 10.1097/JCN.00000 — View Citation

Ryan CJ, Bierle RS, Vuckovic KM. The Three Rs for Preventing Heart Failure Readmission: Review, Reassess, and Reeducate. Crit Care Nurse. 2019 Apr;39(2):85-93. doi: 10.4037/ccn2019345. Erratum In: Crit Care Nurse. 2019 Oct;39(5):12. — View Citation

Sebern M, Riegel B. Contributions of supportive relationships to heart failure self-care. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009 Jun;8(2):97-104. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2008.07.004. Epub 2008 Aug 15. — View Citation

Sebern MD, Woda A. Shared care dyadic intervention: outcome patterns for heart failure care partners. West J Nurs Res. 2012 Apr;34(3):289-316. doi: 10.1177/0193945911399088. Epub 2011 Mar 7. — View Citation

Sebern MD. Refinement of the Shared Care Instrument-Revised: a measure of a family care interaction. J Nurs Meas. 2008;16(1):43-60. doi: 10.1891/1061-3749.16.1.43. — View Citation

Srisuk N, Cameron J, Ski CF, Thompson DR. Randomized controlled trial of family-based education for patients with heart failure and their carers. J Adv Nurs. 2017 Apr;73(4):857-870. doi: 10.1111/jan.13192. Epub 2016 Nov 30. — View Citation

Strachan PH, Currie K, Harkness K, Spaling M, Clark AM. Context matters in heart failure self-care: a qualitative systematic review. J Card Fail. 2014 Jun;20(6):448-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2014.03.010. Epub 2014 Apr 13. — View Citation

Tidermark J, Bergstrom G, Svensson O, Tornkvist H, Ponzer S. Responsiveness of the EuroQol (EQ 5-D) and the SF-36 in elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. Qual Life Res. 2003 Dec;12(8):1069-79. doi: 10.1023/a:1026193812514. — View Citation

Vellone E, Rebora P, Ausili D, Zeffiro V, Pucciarelli G, Caggianelli G, Masci S, Alvaro R, Riegel B. Motivational interviewing to improve self-care in heart failure patients (MOTIVATE-HF): a randomized controlled trial. ESC Heart Fail. 2020 Jun;7(3):1309- — View Citation

Vickerstaff V, Ambler G, King M, Nazareth I, Omar RZ. Are multiple primary outcomes analysed appropriately in randomised controlled trials? A review. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Nov;45(Pt A):8-12. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.016. Epub 2015 Jul 26. — View Citation

Wong EL, Cheung AW, Wong AY, Xu RH, Ramos-Goni JM, Rivero-Arias O. Normative Profile of Health-Related Quality of Life for Hong Kong General Population Using Preference-Based Instrument EQ-5D-5L. Value Health. 2019 Aug;22(8):916-924. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2 — View Citation

Yu DS, Lee DT, Stewart S, Thompson DR, Choi KC, Yu CM. Effect of Nurse-Implemented Transitional Care for Chinese Individuals with Chronic Heart Failure in Hong Kong: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Aug;63(8):1583-93. doi: 10.1111/jgs — View Citation

Yu DS, Li PW, Zhang F, Cheng ST, Ng TK, Judge KS. The effects of a dyadic strength-based empowerment program on the health outcomes of people with mild cognitive impairment and their family caregivers: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Interv Aging. 201 — View Citation

* Note: There are 24 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Self-Care Heart Failure Index (SCHFI, v.7.2)	Measure the self-care maintenance, self-care management, and symptom perception of the HF patients. There are 28 questions are rated from 1 to 5, and one question are rated from 0 to 5. The three subscale scores are transformed to 0-100, with higher scores indicating better self-care attributes.	Baseline
Primary	Self-Care Heart Failure Index (SCHFI, v.7.2)	Measure the self-care maintenance, self-care management, and symptom perception of the HF patients. There are 28 questions are rated from 1 to 5, and one question are rated from 0 to 5. The three subscale scores are transformed to 0-100, with higher scores indicating better self-care attributes.	16th week
Primary	Self-Care Heart Failure Index (SCHFI, v.7.2)	Measure the self-care maintenance, self-care management, and symptom perception of the HF patients. There are 28 questions are rated from 1 to 5, and one question are rated from 0 to 5. The three subscale scores are transformed to 0-100, with higher scores indicating better self-care attributes.	24th week
Primary	Self-Care Heart Failure Index (SCHFI, v.7.2)	Measure the self-care maintenance, self-care management, and symptom perception of the HF patients. There are 28 questions are rated from 1 to 5, and one question are rated from 0 to 5. The three subscale scores are transformed to 0-100, with higher scores indicating better self-care attributes.	32nd week
Primary	Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) questionnaire	Measure the disease-specific HRQL (primary outcome of the HF patient), covering the physical and emotional health of HF patients. There are 21 items and each item is rated from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating poor health.	Baseline
Primary	Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) questionnaire	Measure the disease-specific HRQL (primary outcome of the HF patient), covering the physical and emotional health of HF patients. There are 21 items and each item is rated from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating poor health.	16th week
Primary	Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) questionnaire	Measure the disease-specific HRQL (primary outcome of the HF patient), covering the physical and emotional health of HF patients. There are 21 items and each item is rated from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating poor health.	24th week
Primary	Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) questionnaire	Measure the disease-specific HRQL (primary outcome of the HF patient), covering the physical and emotional health of HF patients. There are 21 items and each item is rated from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating poor health.	32nd week
Primary	The EuroQoL-5D-5L instruments	Assess the health-related quality of life of the care dyads and to generate the utility score for cost-effective analysis. It consists of two parts, with the first part to assess the health status on mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression using a 5-level (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and unable to) response set, with "unable to" levels mean a worse situation. The second part as a 0-100 scores VAS to measure perceived health, higher scores mean a better outcome.	Baseline
Primary	The EuroQoL-5D-5L instruments	Assess the health-related quality of life of the care dyads and to generate the utility score for cost-effective analysis. It consists of two parts, with the first part to assess the health status on mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression using a 5-level (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and unable to) response set, with "unable to" levels mean a worse situation. The second part as a 0-100 scores VAS to measure perceived health, higher scores mean a better outcome.	16th week
Primary	The EuroQoL-5D-5L instruments	Assess the health-related quality of life of the care dyads and to generate the utility score for cost-effective analysis. It consists of two parts, with the first part to assess the health status on mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression using a 5-level (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and unable to) response set, with "unable to" levels mean a worse situation. The second part as a 0-100 scores VAS to measure perceived health, higher scores mean a better outcome.	24th week
Primary	The EuroQoL-5D-5L instruments	Assess the health-related quality of life of the care dyads and to generate the utility score for cost-effective analysis. It consists of two parts, with the first part to assess the health status on mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression using a 5-level (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and unable to) response set, with "unable to" levels mean a worse situation. The second part as a 0-100 scores VAS to measure perceived health, higher scores mean a better outcome.	32nd week
Primary	Shared Care Instrument-Revised (SCI-3)	Measure the level of shared care in terms of communication, decision-making, and reciprocity of care dyads. Each item is rated from zero to five (completely agree, mostly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, mostly disagree, and completely disagree), with higher scores representing better shared care.	Baseline
Primary	Shared Care Instrument-Revised (SCI-3)	Measure the level of shared care in terms of communication, decision-making, and reciprocity of care dyads. Each item is rated from zero to five (completely agree, mostly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, mostly disagree, and completely disagree), with higher scores representing better shared care.	16th week
Primary	Shared Care Instrument-Revised (SCI-3)	Measure the level of shared care in terms of communication, decision-making, and reciprocity of care dyads. Each item is rated from zero to five (completely agree, mostly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, mostly disagree, and completely disagree), with higher scores representing better shared care.	24th week
Primary	Shared Care Instrument-Revised (SCI-3)	Measure the level of shared care in terms of communication, decision-making, and reciprocity of care dyads. Each item is rated from zero to five (completely agree, mostly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, mostly disagree, and completely disagree), with higher scores representing better shared care.	32nd week
Primary	Control Attitude Scale Revised (CAS-R)	Measure the perceived control in disease management. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) and summed to create a total score after two negative items were reverse coded. The possible total score ranges from 8 to 40 with a higher score indicating higher perceived controllability.	Baseline
Primary	Control Attitude Scale Revised (CAS-R)	Measure the perceived control in disease management. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) and summed to create a total score after two negative items were reverse coded. The possible total score ranges from 8 to 40 with a higher score indicating higher perceived controllability.	16th week
Primary	Control Attitude Scale Revised (CAS-R)	Measure the perceived control in disease management. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) and summed to create a total score after two negative items were reverse coded. The possible total score ranges from 8 to 40 with a higher score indicating higher perceived controllability.	24th week
Primary	Control Attitude Scale Revised (CAS-R)	Measure the perceived control in disease management. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) and summed to create a total score after two negative items were reverse coded. The possible total score ranges from 8 to 40 with a higher score indicating higher perceived controllability.	32nd week

External Links

•   Hospital Authority Statistical Report 2016-2017