NCT03532373

Brief Summary

This study will complete a randomized controlled trial to quantitatively measure patient decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale) in 150 patients treated for CTS with the tool compared to 150 patients treated with standard care. The investigators hypothesize patients treated for CTS will have lower decisional conflict with the tool.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
49

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Mar 2021

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

May 9, 2018

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

May 22, 2018

Completed
2.8 years until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

March 1, 2021

Completed
2.3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 1, 2023

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2023

Completed
1.1 years until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

July 3, 2024

Completed
Last Updated

July 3, 2024

Status Verified

June 1, 2024

Enrollment Period

2.3 years

First QC Date

May 9, 2018

Results QC Date

June 10, 2024

Last Update Submit

June 10, 2024

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Decisional Conflict Scale

    The Decisional Conflict Scale measures uncertainty in choosing options; modifiable factors contributing to uncertainty such as feeling uninformed, unclear about personal values and unsupported in decision making; and effective decision making such as feeling the choice is informed, values-based, likely to be implemented and expressing satisfaction with the choice. The survey consists of 16 statements with 5 response categories. Scoring: total scale-0 (no decisional conflict) to 100 (extreme decisional conflict). Lower values indicate lower decisional conflict- i.e. a better outcome for use of the tool. Calculation: Summed, divided by # of items, multiplied by 25

    Immediately after using tool (up to 5 minutes to complete survey)

Study Arms (2)

Control

NO INTERVENTION

None- normal care

Intervention

EXPERIMENTAL

Patients will use a preference elicitation tool to determine their preferences for diagnosis and treatment of CTS

Other: Preference Elicitation tool

Interventions

A preference elicitation tool for carpal tunnel syndrome

Intervention

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • New patient
  • English fluency and literacy
  • Able to take informed consent
  • clinical diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome

You may not qualify if:

  • Prior diagnostic testing for carpal tunnel (nerve test, ultrasound)
  • Prior carpal tunnel release
  • Diagnosis of C5/6 radiculopathy (double crush)
  • Peripheral neuropathy (ex: diabetic)
  • Worker Compensation/EMG Required
  • Symptoms of Cubital tunnel syndrome

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Stanford Health Care

Redwood City, California, 94061, United States

Location

Related Publications (25)

  • Zhang S, Vora M, Harris AH, Baker L, Curtin C, Kamal RN. Cost-Minimization Analysis of Open and Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Dec 7;98(23):1970-1977. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00121.

    PMID: 27926678BACKGROUND
  • Atroshi I, Englund M, Turkiewicz A, Tagil M, Petersson IF. Incidence of physician-diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome in the general population. Arch Intern Med. 2011 May 23;171(10):943-4. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.203. No abstract available.

    PMID: 21606100BACKGROUND
  • Fajardo M, Kim SH, Szabo RM. Incidence of carpal tunnel release: trends and implications within the United States ambulatory care setting. J Hand Surg Am. 2012 Aug;37(8):1599-605. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.04.035. Epub 2012 Jun 23.

    PMID: 22727925BACKGROUND
  • Hageman MG, Kinaci A, Ju K, Guitton TG, Mudgal CS, Ring D; Science of Variation Group. Carpal tunnel syndrome: assessment of surgeon and patient preferences and priorities for decision-making. J Hand Surg Am. 2014 Sep;39(9):1799-1804.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.05.035. Epub 2014 Aug 1.

    PMID: 25087865BACKGROUND
  • Oshima Lee E, Emanuel EJ. Shared decision making to improve care and reduce costs. N Engl J Med. 2013 Jan 3;368(1):6-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1209500. No abstract available.

    PMID: 23281971BACKGROUND
  • Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Kinnersley P, Cording E, Tomson D, Dodd C, Rollnick S, Edwards A, Barry M. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Oct;27(10):1361-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6. Epub 2012 May 23.

    PMID: 22618581BACKGROUND
  • Alfandre D. Clinical Recommendations in Medical Practice: A Proposed Framework to Reduce Bias and Improve the Quality of Medical Decisions. J Clin Ethics. 2016 Spring;27(1):21-7.

    PMID: 27045301BACKGROUND
  • Mulley AG, Trimble C, Elwyn G. Stop the silent misdiagnosis: patients' preferences matter. BMJ. 2012 Nov 8;345:e6572. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e6572. No abstract available.

    PMID: 23137819BACKGROUND
  • Lang F, Floyd MR, Beine KL. Clues to patients' explanations and concerns about their illnesses. A call for active listening. Arch Fam Med. 2000 Mar;9(3):222-7. doi: 10.1001/archfami.9.3.222.

    PMID: 10728107BACKGROUND
  • Johnson DC, Mueller DE, Deal AM, Dunn MW, Smith AB, Woods ME, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS, Nielsen ME. Integrating Patient Preference into Treatment Decisions for Men with Prostate Cancer at the Point of Care. J Urol. 2016 Dec;196(6):1640-1644. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.06.082. Epub 2016 Jun 23.

    PMID: 27346032BACKGROUND
  • Fraenkel L, Chodkowski D, Lim J, Garcia-Tsao G. Patients' preferences for treatment of hepatitis C. Med Decis Making. 2010 Jan-Feb;30(1):45-57. doi: 10.1177/0272989X09341588. Epub 2009 Jul 27.

    PMID: 19636065BACKGROUND
  • Hageman MG, Bossen JK, Neuhaus V, Mudgal CS, Ring D; Science of Variation Group. Assessment of Decisional Conflict about the Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome, Comparing Patients and Physicians. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2016 Apr;4(2):150-5.

    PMID: 27200394BACKGROUND
  • Kamal RN; Hand Surgery Quality Consortium. Quality and Value in an Evolving Health Care Landscape. J Hand Surg Am. 2016 Jul;41(7):794-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.05.016.

    PMID: 27374791BACKGROUND
  • Keith MW, Masear V, Amadio PC, Andary M, Barth RW, Graham B, Chung K, Maupin K, Watters WC 3rd, Haralson RH 3rd, Turkelson CM, Wies JL, McGowan R. Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009 Jun;17(6):397-405. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200906000-00008.

    PMID: 19474449BACKGROUND
  • Newington L, Harris EC, Walker-Bone K. Carpal tunnel syndrome and work. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2015 Jun;29(3):440-53. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2015.04.026. Epub 2015 May 27.

    PMID: 26612240BACKGROUND
  • Graham B. The value added by electrodiagnostic testing in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Dec;90(12):2587-93. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01362.

    PMID: 19047703BACKGROUND
  • Graham B. The diagnosis and treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. BMJ. 2006 Jun 24;332(7556):1463-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7556.1463. No abstract available.

    PMID: 16793786BACKGROUND
  • Graham B, Regehr G, Naglie G, Wright JG. Development and validation of diagnostic criteria for carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 2006 Jul-Aug;31(6):919-24.

    PMID: 16886290BACKGROUND
  • Fowler JR, Cipolli W, Hanson T. A Comparison of Three Diagnostic Tests for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Using Latent Class Analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015 Dec 2;97(23):1958-61. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.O.00476.

    PMID: 26631997BACKGROUND
  • Pulikkottil BJ, Schub M, Kadow TR, Wang W, Fowler JR. Correlating Median Nerve Cross-sectional Area With Nerve Conduction Studies. J Hand Surg Am. 2016 Oct;41(10):958-962. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.08.018.

    PMID: 27702467BACKGROUND
  • Flynn KE, Weinfurt KP, Seils DM, Lin L, Burnett CB, Schulman KA, Meropol NJ. Decisional conflict among patients who accept or decline participation in phase I oncology studies. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008 Sep;3(3):69-77. doi: 10.1525/jer.2008.3.3.69.

    PMID: 19122780BACKGROUND
  • Hyman DJ, Pavlik VN, Greisinger AJ, Chan W, Bayona J, Mansyur C, Simms V, Pool J. Effect of a physician uncertainty reduction intervention on blood pressure in uncontrolled hypertensives--a cluster randomized trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Apr;27(4):413-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1888-1. Epub 2011 Oct 27.

    PMID: 22033742BACKGROUND
  • Wittink MN, Cary M, Tenhave T, Baron J, Gallo JJ. TOWARDS PATIENT-CENTERED CARE FOR DEPRESSION: CONJOINT METHODS TO TAILOR TREATMENT BASED ON PREFERENCES. Patient. 2010;3(3):145-157. doi: 10.2165/11530660.

    PMID: 20671803BACKGROUND
  • Baker LC, Bundorf MK, Kessler DP. Patients' preferences explain a small but significant share of regional variation in medicare spending. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014 Jun;33(6):957-63. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1184.

    PMID: 24889944BACKGROUND
  • Hampson LA, Allen IE, Gaither TW, Lin T, Ting J, Osterberg EC, Wilson L, Breyer BN. Patient-centered Treatment Decisions for Urethral Stricture: Conjoint Analysis Improves Surgical Decision-making. Urology. 2017 Jan;99:246-253. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.07.053. Epub 2016 Sep 16.

    PMID: 27645527BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Median NeuropathyCarpal Tunnel Syndrome

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

MononeuropathiesPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesNeuromuscular DiseasesNervous System DiseasesNerve Compression SyndromesCumulative Trauma DisordersSprains and StrainsWounds and Injuries

Results Point of Contact

Title
Robin Kamal
Organization
Stanford University

Study Officials

  • Robin N Kamal, MD

    Stanford University

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
No
Restrictive Agreement
No

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Masking Details
No masking will occur
Purpose
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Participants are randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Assistant Professor

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

May 9, 2018

First Posted

May 22, 2018

Study Start

March 1, 2021

Primary Completion

June 1, 2023

Study Completion

June 1, 2023

Last Updated

July 3, 2024

Results First Posted

July 3, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-06

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

IPD will not be shared with other researchers

Locations