Skip to content

Prognosticating Outcomes and Nudging Decisions With Electronic Records in the ICU Trial

Behavioral Economic Approaches to Improve Palliative Care for Critically Ill Patients

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03139838
Acronym
PONDER-ICU
Enrollment
3500
Registered
2017-05-04
Start date
2018-02-01
Completion date
2022-06-30
Last updated
2022-08-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Critical Illness

Keywords

Palliative Care, Pragmatic Clinical Trial, Electronic Health Records, Economics, Behavioral

Brief summary

This is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial testing the real-world effectiveness of two different electronic health record (EHR) behavioral interventions in improving a number of patient- and family-centered processes and outcomes of care among seriously ill hospitalized patients. The investigators hypothesize that outcomes can be improved without raising costs by requiring intensive care unit clinicians to (i) document a prognostic estimate and (ii) provide a justification if they choose not to offer patients the option of comfort-oriented care. To test this hypothesis the investigators will conduct a 33-month trial at 17 intensive care units in 10 hospitals using the same Cerner EHR within Atrium Health System.

Detailed description

The PONDER-ICU trial aims to generate large-scale, experimental evidence regarding the real-world effectiveness of two different electronic health record (EHR) behavioral interventions in improving a number of patient- and family-centered processes and outcomes of care among seriously ill hospitalized patients. The interventions are designed to increase intensive care unit (ICU) physicians' and advanced practitioners' (physician assistants and nurse practitioners) engagement of critically ill patients and caregivers in discussions about alternative treatment options, including care focused on comfort. To achieve this goal, the investigators will conduct a 33-month pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial at 17 ICUs within 10 Atrium Health System hospitals. The investigators hypothesize that outcomes can be improved without raising costs by requiring ICU clinicians to (i) document a prognostic estimate (Intervention A) and (ii) provide a justification if they choose not to offer patients the option of comfort-oriented care (Intervention B). Approximately 4,750 adult patients (1) with chronic life-limiting illness and receiving continuous mechanical ventilation for ≥48 hours will be enrolled. Participating hospitals will be randomized into 5 clusters of 2 hospitals each. Each hospital will first contribute a minimum of 5 months of data collection during usual care in a control phase. Then, using the step-wedge design, all hospitals will implement the two EHR-based interventions. The order in which the interventions will be adopted and the timing of adoption at each hospital will both be determined by random assignment. After 12 months of utilizing Intervention A or Intervention B, each hospital will adopt and implement the second intervention in combination with the other. By the end of the trial, all hospitals will have utilized the combined interventions for at least 4 months. The primary outcome is a composite measure of hospital length of stay and mortality. Secondary outcomes include an array of clinical outcomes, as well as palliative care-related process measures.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALEHR-Based Intervention A

Intervention A will be a prompt for clinicians to document an estimated prognosis for patients at 6 months, and an assessment of predicted functional outcome if expected to survive.

BEHAVIORALEHR-Based Intervention B

Intervention B will entail a prompt for clinicians to provide a reason for not offering patients and their families the alternative of care focused entirely on comfort despite recommendations from critical care professional societies to do so for patients at high risk for death or severely impaired functional recovery.

Sponsors

Wake Forest University Health Sciences
CollaboratorOTHER
Donaghue Medical Research Foundation
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Pennsylvania
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. ≥18 years old; AND 2. Admitted to 1 of the 17 participating ICUs; AND 3. Receipt of continuous mechanical ventilation for ≥ 48 hours (without interruption); AND 4. ≥ 1 life-limiting illness present on admission (ICD-9/10 code or discrete medical history data from EHR in prior 12 months): 1. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 2. Cirrhosis 3. Congestive heart failure 4. Dementia (all types) 5. End-stage renal disease 6. Hematologic malignancy 7. Metastatic malignancy 8. Motor neuron disease 9. Pulmonary fibrosis 10. Solid organ malignancy

Exclusion criteria

1\) Patients younger than 18 years old are excluded.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Composite Measure: Length of Stay and In-Hospital MortalityDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysThe primary outcome is a composite measure of hospital length-of-stay and mortality that ranks deaths along the length-of-stay distribution

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Time to palliative care consultDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysThe number of hours from ICU admission to inpatient palliative care consult
Change in code statusDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysChange in documented code status during hospital admission
Initiation of additional forms of life-supportDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysInitiation of additional form of life-support (e.g. surgical feeding tube, dialysis) during hospital admission
Palliative withdrawal of mechanical ventilationDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysPalliative withdrawal of mechanical ventilation during hospital admission
Receipt of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)Duration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysCPR prior to death or discharge
ICU mortalityDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysICU mortality
ICU length of stayDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysICU length of stay (hours)
ICU readmissionDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysReadmission to an ICU within the same hospitalization
Duration of mechanical ventilationDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysHours of mechanical ventilation during hospital admission
Palliative care consultDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysReceipt of palliative care consult during hospital admission
Hospital discharge dispositionDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysHospital discharge disposition to home, hospice, long-term acute care, nursing facility, or rehabilitation
Quality of Dying & Death (1-item)48-72 hours following an in-hospital deathNurse-reported postmortem rating of a patient's dying experience
30-day hospital readmission30 days30-day hospital readmission
90-day hospital readmission30 days30-day hospital readmission
180-day hospital readmission30 days30-day hospital readmission
30-day mortality30 daysMortality rate at 30 days
90-day mortality90 daysMortality rate at 90 days
180-day mortality180 daysMortality rate at 180 days
Hospital free days180 daysHospital free days within 180 days
Time to withdrawal of life-supportDuration of hospital stay, an expected average of 16 daysThe number of hours from trial enrollment to time that comfort-care order is placed

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 24, 2026