Healthcare Professionals working in Rheumatology
Conditions
Interventions
Group 1: Eligible probands will be randomized in equal proportions between the control group receiving an oral lecture supported by a PowerPoint slideshow and the intervention group receiving an educa
Sponsors
Justus Liebig Universität Gießen, Campus Kerckhoff, Abt. für Rheumatologie, Immunologie, Osteologie und Physikalische Medizin
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Healthcare Professional working in Rheumatology
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Key Exclusion Criteria. Please see study protocol for a complete list. - a diagnosis of a rheumatic disease - neurologic disease prohibiting the use of virtual reality - any disease prohiniting the use of virtual reality
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The primary outcome of this study is the difference in disease-specific knowledge of RA measured by the Patient Knowledge Questionnaire (PKQ) by Hill et al. [2] The PKQ was designed to measure RA-specific knowledge and is a validated instrument [2]. The PKQ includes topics which patients themselves had identified as important [11]. Therefore, four major areas were chosen for the PKQ: 1. General knowledge, including etiology, symptoms, and tests; 2. Drugs and how to take them; 3. Exercise regimens; 4. Joint protection, pacing and priorities. The PKQ was designed to be self-administered. Scoring of the questionnaire was one point for each correct answer with a maximum score of 30 points in 16 questions. The general knowledge section of the PKQ included questions on etiology, associated symptoms, and blood tests. A maximum score of 9 can be achieved in this section consisting of four questions. The section on drugs consists of four question with a maximum possible score of 7 points. There are four questions on exercise regiments with a maximum possible score of 7 points. There are four questions in the section on joint protection, pacing, and priorities with a maximum possible score of 7 points. Test-retest reliability was used to test the PKQ’s stability (r = 0.81), and Kuder Richardson formula 20 (r = 0.72) for internal consistency [2]. All questions of the PKQ are shown in the appendix. As the PKQ was published in 1991 [2], we designed an additional questionnaire focusing on morphological aspects of the disease like “Which joints are affected by the disease [RA]?” and aspects of the disease known later than 1991 like antibodies against cyclic peptides (ACPA). In nine additional questions a maximum possible score of 21 points can be achieved. All questions are shown in the appendix. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The differences between the two groups (intervention group / control group) in the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ) by Broadbent et al. [3] and in the adapted Consultation And Relational Empathy (CARE) Questionnaire by Mercer et al. [4] at 4 weeks after the intervention (V3) will serve as secondary outcome measures. The BIPQ, a nine-item scale designed to rapidly assess the cognitive and emotional representations of illness, is a validated instrument [3]. The BIPQ showed good test-retest reliability and concurrent validity with relevant measures [3]. The nine items of the BIPQ are shown in the appendix. The items were developed by forming one question that best summarized the items contained in each subscale of the IPQ-R [3,12]. The items (except the causal question) are rated using a 0to 10 response scale. Five of the items assess cognitive illness representations: consequences (Item 1), timeline (Item 2), personal control (Item 3), treatment control (Item 4), and identity (Item 5). Two of the items assess emotional representations: concern (Item 6) and emotions (Item 8). One item assesses illness comprehensibility (Item 7). The causal representation is assessed by an open-ended response item adapted from the IPQ-R [12], which asks patients to list the three most important causal factors for their illness (Item 9). Responses to the causal item can be grouped into categories such as stress, lifestyle, hereditary, etc., determined by the illness studied. Afterwards, a categorical analysis of the causes of illness can be performed. Like the IPQ and IPQ-R, the most general version of the BIPQ uses the word “illness”, but it is possible to replace this with the concrete name of a illness such as diabetes or asthma. Similarly, the treatment control item uses the word “treatment”, but this can be replaced by “surgery” or “inhaler” if researchers are interested in a particular treatment. The CARE Questionnaire was designed to measure relational empathy and | — |
Countries
Germany
Contacts
Public ContactPhilipp Klemm
Justus Liebig Universität Gießen, Campus Kerckhoff, Abt. für Rheumatologie, Immunologie, Osteologie und Physikalische Medizin
Outcome results
None listed