Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Covid/PI Vacancy
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The investigator will conduct a two-site, randomized, controlled study of the HoPE (Hospice Preparation and Education) web-based tool versus usual care to assess: Technology usability (primary), study feasibility (secondary), user acceptability (secondary), and hospice service conversion rate (exploratory). Technology usability will be assessed through a one-time quantitative survey using established instruments. Study feasibility and user accessibility will be assessed through trial enrollment and retention alongside analytics assessing tool usage (e.g. time spent on each page of the website). Conversion rate is the percent of patients introduced to hospice who eventually enroll. The investigators will evaluate in an exploratory manner the differential effect of HoPE versus usual care.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of Care | No Intervention | ||
| Standard of Care + HoPE | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HoPE Website | Other | Educational website focused on hospice care |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Technology usability as measured by System Usability Scale | To determine usability, the System Usability Scale will be administered to each participant in the intervention arm. As described by usability.gov: "The participant's scores for each question are converted to a new number, added together and then multiplied by 2.5 to convert the original scores of 0-40 to 0-100. Though the scores are 0-100, these are not percentages and should be considered only in terms of their percentile ranking. Based on research, a SUS score above a 68 would be considered above average and anything below 68 is below average, however the best way to interpret your results involves "normalizing" the scores to produce a percentile ranking." | At study completion, up to 4 months. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Study Feasibility as measured by enrollment efficiency | Enrollment efficiency will be measured by the percentage of patients approached who enroll in the study, with the goal of >50% enrollment. | At study completion, up to 4 months |
| Study Feasibility as measured by intervention completion |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Arif Kamal, MD | Duke University | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duke University Medical Center | Durham | North Carolina | 27710 | United States | ||
| WakeMed Health & Hospitals |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Intervention completion will be measured by the percentage of participants on the intervention arm who complete at least 50% of the modules within the intervention website, with a goal of >50% of the participants. |
| At study completion, up to 4 months |
| User Accessibility as measured by Net Promoter score | The Net Promoter scale is administered to participants in the intervention arm of the study only. This scale is an eleven-item likert scale assessing likelihood to recommend the intervention to a family member or friend. The percentage of participants who give a score of 0 through 6 is subtracted by the percentage of participants who give a score of 9 or 10 to give the overall Net Promoter score. This score is then compared to other scores of similar technologies. | At study completion, up to 4 months |
| Raleigh |
| North Carolina |
| 27610 |
| United States |