Malignant Neoplasm
Conditions
Brief summary
This randomized pilot clinical trial studies tailored patient educational intervention or standard education in assessing perceived risk for falls in hospitalized oncology patients. A tailored patient educational intervention may be more beneficial than standard education in preventing patients from falling by increasing the patient's knowledge of the risk factors for falling routinely and then providing education in deficit areas. Making patients more aware of the risk factors for falling may lead to greater engagement in preventative activities.
Detailed description
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate the effect of a tailored, nurse-delivered intervention, as compared to the control group, on perceived risk for falls in hospitalized hematology-oncology patients. II. To evaluate the effect of a tailored, nurse-delivered intervention, as compared to the control group, on confidence to minimize falls in hospitalized hematology-oncology patients. III. To evaluate the relationship between patients' perceived risk for falling and their willingness to call for assistance with ambulation. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate the relationship between patients' perceived risk for falls and nursing risk assessments when using the standard hospital assessment tool and the investigator-designed perceived risk survey. II. To evaluate the relationship between a patients' perceived risk for falls and sustaining a fall. III. To evaluate patient satisfaction with the intervention. OUTLINE: All participants complete the Perceived Risk Survey comprising the participants' perceived risk for falls, their confidence to prevent a fall, and their willingness to ask for assistance at baseline and at 24 and 72 hours (or at discharge if stay is less than 72 hours) post-intervention. Patients are then randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Participants receive tailored education comprising one of four two-minute videos determined by which educational group the participant is placed in: high risk/high perception, high risk/low perception, low risk/high perception, or low risk/low perception. Participants also receive printed education sheets based on the participants' answers given on the Perceived Risk Survey and are tailored to the participants' perception of falls risk. ARM II: Participants receive a generic educational instruction sheet on falls prevention and receive standard care by nurses comprising a falls risk assessment and verbal education.
Interventions
OTHERTailored education intervention
Receive 2 minute video-assisted intervention on the risk and prevention of falls with tailored hand-outs depending on participant answers about fall risks
OTHERStandard fall care
Patient are given a generic handout on falling and receive standard care by nurses comprising of a fall risk assessment and verbal education
Sponsors
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Case Comprehensive Cancer Center
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of cancer * Admitted to the third floor of Seidman Cancer Center (SCC) * Cognitively intact (alert, oriented to self, place, and time, and able to participate in the intervention) * Ability to speak, read, and comprehend English
Exclusion criteria
* Nonmalignant diagnosis * Actively dying * Patients with a physician order for bed rest
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Perceived risk for falls grouped according to the nurses assessment of risk using the University Hospitals (UH) Falls Assessment Tool | Up to 8 weeks | Changes in pre vs post survey for the High Risk/Low Perception group will be compared to all others using a paired McNemar's test for both those receiving the intervention and controls. Pre and post scores will be compared between those receiving the intervention and controls using chi square tests. |
| Confidence to minimize falls assessed using the UH Falls Assessment Tool and the investigator-constructed Perceived Risk Survey (Nurse version) | Up to 8 weeks | Pre vs post survey changes will be compared in confidence group using a paired McNemar's test for both those receiving the intervention and controls. Pre and post scores will be compared between those receiving the intervention and controls using chi square tests. |
| Willingness to call for assistance | Up to 8 weeks | An eight-point Likert scale will be used. Pre vs post survey changes in willingness group will be compared using a paired McNemars test. Relationship between Risk/Perception group status and Willingness group will be assessed using a chi-square test stratified by pre or post survey results for both those receiving the intervention and controls. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient's satisfaction of the intervention using the final questions on the Perceived Risk Post-Survey | Up to 8 weeks | Descriptive statistics will be used by the distribution of pre vs post perceived risk values. |
| Relationship between patients perceived risk for falls and nurses risk assessments | Up to 8 weeks | Descriptive statistics will be used to compare scores self-perceived risks of falling with a nurse's assessment of a patient falling |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed