Skip to content

Specialty Medical Homes to Improve Outcomes for Patients With IBD and Behavioral Health Conditions

Specialty Medical Homes to Improve Outcomes for Patients With IBD and Behavioral Health Conditions

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03985800
Enrollment
657
Registered
2019-06-14
Start date
2019-07-01
Completion date
2025-03-28
Last updated
2025-09-03

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

Conditions

Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Behavioral Symptoms

Brief summary

A comparative effectiveness study using an individual-level randomized design along with a pragmatic, mixed-methods approach to compare two strategies (e.g. in-person supported care, technology-supported care) all of which include evidence-based components for delivering IBD and BH care. Quantitative (e.g. self-report, electronic health record, process) and qualitative (e.g., interviews) data will be collected across multiple time points during the study period.

Detailed description

The investigators propose to conduct a comparative effectiveness research (CER) study of two evidence-based, patient-centered approaches implemented within an existing Specialty Medical Home (SMH) model: TEAM, an in-person, multidisciplinary team-based approach delivered at point of care and TECH, a technology-based (digital therapeutics, and telehealth) approach delivered at the patient's convenience with the guidance of health coaches. Both are designed to support care for adult patients with complex, chronic health conditions and behavioral health (BH) disorders, and will be tested in three of the nation's largest and most established SMHs for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IBD serves as an exemplary chronic disease model where untreated BH issues have been associated with poor medical outcomes. Primary outcomes are composite scores of measures focused on 1) IBD Symptom Severity, and 2) BH Symptom Severity. IBD Symptom Severity is measured via a composite IBD Complexity Score involving responses to two patient-reported scales: the PROMIS-GI measure and either the Harvey Bradshaw Index (for participants with Crohn's disease) or ulcerative colitis activity index (for participants with ulcerative colitis). BH Symptom Severity was measured utilizing the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety-Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS), a composite of two patient-reported scale for measuring anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-8). Scales are further defined in Results, Outcome Measures.

Interventions

OTHERTEAM

TEAM incorporates team-based care with traditional in-person clinic visits. The care team includes a gastroenterologist, nurse practitioner, nutritionist, social worker/behavioral health specialist, and a psychologist or psychiatrist.

OTHERTECH

TECH uses team-based care similar to TEAM, but in-person care is substituted with telemedicine (i.e., video visits and consultations) and digital behavioral health tools.

Sponsors

Mount Sinai Hospital, New York
CollaboratorOTHER
The Cleveland Clinic
CollaboratorOTHER
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Pittsburgh
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Comparison between technology interventions and in-person interventions.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Inflammatory Bowel Disease Diagnosis of Crohn's or Ulcerative Colitis. Behavioral health symptoms mild to severe, defined as a score of \>= 6 on the Personal Health Questionnaire 4 (PHQ4)

Exclusion criteria

* Lack of smart phone, and/or are unable to speak, read or understand English at the minimum-required level.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
IBD Symptom SeverityCompare scores at Baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesIBD symptom severity was measured via a composite IBD Complexity Score developed by clinical researchers to quantify both biological and psychosocial domains of IBD within an SMH setting. It includes the sum of patient-reported responses to two scales: the PROMIS GI symptoms scale, evaluating four domains of gastrointestinal symptoms; and disease-specific PRO-2 disease severity indices taken from the Harvey Bradshaw Index (for individuals with Crohn's disease) and Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (for individuals with ulcerative colitis). The complexity score is calculated by adding the value of the patient's PRO-2 to the cumulative PROMIS-GI score. Lower scores indicate lower symptom severity; higher scores indicate higher symptom severity. The minimum score is 0; the maximum score is open-ended based on patient response. Only the total IBD Complexity Score is reported.
Behavioral Health Symptom SeverityCompare at Baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesBehavioral health symptom severity was measured utilizing the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety-Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS) - which combines the PHQ-8 and GAD-7 scales - as a composite measure of depression and anxiety. The Patient Health Questionnaire 8-item depression scale (PHQ-8) and 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are among the best validated and most commonly used depression and anxiety measures, respectively. The PHQ-ADS is the sum of the PHQ-8 and GAD-7, where a decrease in scores indicates a decrease in BH symptom severity; a decrease of 3-4 points indicates MCID. Lower scores indicate lower levels of behavioral health symptom severity; higher scores indicate higher symptom severity. The minimum score is 0; the maximum score is 45. Only the total PHQ-ADS is reported.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Health Care UtilizationCompare at baseline, 6-month and 12-months for any changesHealth care utilization was captured through EHR data to measure categorical (yes or no) instances of ED visits and inpatient hospitalizations at both 6- and 12-months post-enrollment.
Functional ImpairmentCompare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesFunctional impairment was measured using the validated Short Form 12 Health Survey Version 2 (SF-12v2) which includes 12 items from the Short-Form 36 Health Survey and yields a physical and mental composite score as well as 8 subscale values: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Responses are tallied via a norm-based scoring algorithm provided by the assessment licensing company. Lower scores correspond with poorer health-related functioning; higher scores indicate better health-related functioning. The minimum score is 18.5; the maximum score is 142.6. Only the total composite score (the sum of both the physical and mental scales) is reported.
Quality of LifeCompare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesQuality of life was evaluated using the Short Quality of Life in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ), a validated tool which measures physical, social, and emotional health-related quality of life (QOL) for patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. On a 7-point scale, lower scores correspond with a lower perceived QOL, while higher scores represent a higher perceived QOL. Responses for each question are summed for a total score between 10 and 70, with 10 reflecting poor QOL and 70 reflecting high QOL. Each item is scored 1-7, with 1 being assigned for responses indicating the highest severity of symptoms, and 7 being assigned for those reflecting the lowest severity of symptoms. Only total scores are reported.
Patient EngagementCompare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesPatient engagement was measured using the validated IBD Self-Efficacy Scale (IBD-SES) which assesses one's confidence level in managing stress and emotions, managing medical care, managing symptoms and disease, and maintaining remission. The IBD-SES measures self-management activities across four subscales (Stress and Emotions; Medical Care; Symptoms and Disease; Remission), with higher scores indicating greater confidence in self-management. Responses for each question are summed to produce one overall and four subscale scores. The total score range is between 29 and 290, with 29 indicating the lowest level of self-efficacy and 290 indicating the highest. Each item is scored 1-10, with 1 being assigned for responses of Not confident at all and a score of 10 assigned for responses of Totally confident. Only total scores are reported.
IBD-IBS Symptom SeverityCompare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changesIBD-IBS Symptom Severity was measured using the Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS) to more accurately capture IBD symptom severity for many individuals with IBD, particularly those with inactive IBD but persistent functional GI symptoms (e.g., IBD-IBS). The IBS-SSS scores pain severity, pain frequency, abdominal bloating, bowel satisfaction and interference with life on a 0-100 scale with a total score of 500. A 50-point or more reduction in this score is considered clinically meaningful. Total scores range from 0 to 500 with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. Answers to all questions are summed to achieve the total score. Subjects can be categorized as having mild (75-175), moderate (175-300), or severe (\>300) IBS. Only total scores are reported.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Recruitment began on July 1, 2019 and was completed on February 28, 2024. A brief pause in recruitment occurred between March 13 and September 13, 2020 to account for disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. All participants were recruited from one of three specialty medical home clinics at large urban academic centers in the northeastern US: UPMC in Pittsburgh, Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, and the Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland.

Pre-assignment details

All participants were randomly assigned to one of the two intervention arms upon successful enrollment in the study. Allocation was stratified based on age (18-30 or 31-60), IBD diagnosis (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis) and disease activity (low or high).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
TEAM
TEAM is a high-human touch, multidisciplinary specialty medical home approach that connects participants with a personalized care team including gastroenterologists, advanced practice providers, behavioral health specialists, dietitians, registered nurses, pharmacists, and health coordinators who provide intensive support and resources for patients.
329
TECH
TECH is a low-human touch approach leveraging behavioral digital tools - primarily RxWell, a digital cognitive behavioral therapy mobile application with embedded health coaches - to deliver behavioral health care at the patient's convenience.
328
Total657

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyDeath12
Overall StudyProtocol Violation20
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject36

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTEAMTotalTECH
Advanced therapy
No
144 Participants303 Participants159 Participants
Advanced therapy
Yes
185 Participants354 Participants169 Participants
Age, Continuous34.7 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.6
34.8 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.7
34.9 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.8
Comorbidity
No
182 Participants367 Participants185 Participants
Comorbidity
Yes
147 Participants290 Participants143 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
17 Participants30 Participants13 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
269 Participants544 Participants275 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
43 Participants83 Participants40 Participants
IBD Diagnosis
Crohn's disease
222 Participants440 Participants218 Participants
IBD Diagnosis
Ulcerative colitis
107 Participants217 Participants110 Participants
Opioid use
Missing
5 Participants10 Participants5 Participants
Opioid use
No
216 Participants434 Participants218 Participants
Opioid use
Yes
108 Participants213 Participants105 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
6 Participants9 Participants3 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
24 Participants37 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
5 Participants16 Participants11 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
40 Participants70 Participants30 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
254 Participants525 Participants271 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Female
211 Participants424 Participants213 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Male
93 Participants183 Participants90 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Missing
22 Participants45 Participants23 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Other
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Prefer not to answer
1 Participants2 Participants1 Participants
Steroid Use
No
208 Participants417 Participants209 Participants
Steroid Use
Yes
121 Participants240 Participants119 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
1 / 3292 / 328
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 3290 / 328
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 3290 / 328

Outcome results

Primary

Behavioral Health Symptom Severity

Behavioral health symptom severity was measured utilizing the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety-Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS) - which combines the PHQ-8 and GAD-7 scales - as a composite measure of depression and anxiety. The Patient Health Questionnaire 8-item depression scale (PHQ-8) and 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are among the best validated and most commonly used depression and anxiety measures, respectively. The PHQ-ADS is the sum of the PHQ-8 and GAD-7, where a decrease in scores indicates a decrease in BH symptom severity; a decrease of 3-4 points indicates MCID. Lower scores indicate lower levels of behavioral health symptom severity; higher scores indicate higher symptom severity. The minimum score is 0; the maximum score is 45. Only the total PHQ-ADS is reported.

Time frame: Compare at Baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at baseline25.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.88
TEAMBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up18.7 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.9
TEAMBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up18.0 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.2
TECHBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up19.7 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.9
TECHBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at baseline26.2 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.94
TECHBehavioral Health Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up19.2 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.5
Comparison: Aim 1. The trajectory of PHQ-ADS does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.9Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2a, moderation by disease activity. Null hypothesis: Disease activity does not moderate the trajectory of behavioral health score by treatment group.p-value: 0.55Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b, moderation by age. Null hypothesis: Age does not moderate the trajectory of behavioral health score by treatment group.p-value: 0.5Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b, moderation by diagnosis. Null hypothesis: Diagnosis does not moderate the trajectory of behavioral health score by treatment group.p-value: 0.08Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b, moderation by site. Null hypothesis: Site does not moderate the trajectory of behavioral health score by treatment group.p-value: 1Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b, moderation by eHealth literacy. Null hypothesis: eHealth literacy does not moderate the trajectory of behavioral health score by treatment group.p-value: 0.2Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

IBD Symptom Severity

IBD symptom severity was measured via a composite IBD Complexity Score developed by clinical researchers to quantify both biological and psychosocial domains of IBD within an SMH setting. It includes the sum of patient-reported responses to two scales: the PROMIS GI symptoms scale, evaluating four domains of gastrointestinal symptoms; and disease-specific PRO-2 disease severity indices taken from the Harvey Bradshaw Index (for individuals with Crohn's disease) and Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (for individuals with ulcerative colitis). The complexity score is calculated by adding the value of the patient's PRO-2 to the cumulative PROMIS-GI score. Lower scores indicate lower symptom severity; higher scores indicate higher symptom severity. The minimum score is 0; the maximum score is open-ended based on patient response. Only the total IBD Complexity Score is reported.

Time frame: Compare scores at Baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

Population: Participants were included in the analysis for IBD Symptom Severity as long as they had complete covariate data and the IBD Complexity Score measured at at least one timepoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMIBD Symptom SeverityScore at baseline75.9 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 31
TEAMIBD Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up63.5 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 30
TEAMIBD Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up62.3 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 31.2
TECHIBD Symptom SeverityScore at baseline79.9 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 31.3
TECHIBD Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up65.0 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.2
TECHIBD Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up64.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.2
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of IBD complexity score does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.53Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b., moderation by age. Null hypothesis: Age does not moderate the trajectory of complexity score by treatment group.p-value: 0.57Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b., moderation by diagnosis. Null hypothesis: Diagnosis does not moderate the trajectory of complexity score by treatment group.p-value: 0.96Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b., moderation by site. Null hypothesis: Site does not moderate the trajectory of complexity score by treatment group.p-value: 0.17Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Aim 2b., moderation by eHealth literacy. Null hypothesis: eHealth literacy does not moderate the trajectory of complexity score by treatment group.p-value: 0.27Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Functional Impairment

Functional impairment was measured using the validated Short Form 12 Health Survey Version 2 (SF-12v2) which includes 12 items from the Short-Form 36 Health Survey and yields a physical and mental composite score as well as 8 subscale values: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Responses are tallied via a norm-based scoring algorithm provided by the assessment licensing company. Lower scores correspond with poorer health-related functioning; higher scores indicate better health-related functioning. The minimum score is 18.5; the maximum score is 142.6. Only the total composite score (the sum of both the physical and mental scales) is reported.

Time frame: Compare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMFunctional ImpairmentScore at 12-month follow-up33.3 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.7
TEAMFunctional ImpairmentScore at baseline37.6 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.57
TEAMFunctional ImpairmentScore at 6-month follow-up34.2 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.98
TECHFunctional ImpairmentScore at baseline38.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.36
TECHFunctional ImpairmentScore at 6-month follow-up34.7 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.58
TECHFunctional ImpairmentScore at 12-month follow-up33.5 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.07
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of functional impairment does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.53Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Health Care Utilization

Health care utilization was captured through EHR data to measure categorical (yes or no) instances of ED visits and inpatient hospitalizations at both 6- and 12-months post-enrollment.

Time frame: Compare at baseline, 6-month and 12-months for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsYes27 Participants
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsMissing5 Participants
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsYes35 Participants
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsNo292 Participants
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsMissing2 Participants
TEAMHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsNo297 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsMissing1 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsYes31 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsNo291 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsMissing0 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationED VisitsNo297 Participants
TECHHealth Care UtilizationHospitalizationsYes36 Participants
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of hospitalizations does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.13Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of ED visits does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.67Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

IBD-IBS Symptom Severity

IBD-IBS Symptom Severity was measured using the Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS) to more accurately capture IBD symptom severity for many individuals with IBD, particularly those with inactive IBD but persistent functional GI symptoms (e.g., IBD-IBS). The IBS-SSS scores pain severity, pain frequency, abdominal bloating, bowel satisfaction and interference with life on a 0-100 scale with a total score of 500. A 50-point or more reduction in this score is considered clinically meaningful. Total scores range from 0 to 500 with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. Answers to all questions are summed to achieve the total score. Subjects can be categorized as having mild (75-175), moderate (175-300), or severe (\>300) IBS. Only total scores are reported.

Time frame: Compare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up185 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 125
TEAMIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up174 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 124
TEAMIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at baseline222 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 135
TECHIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at baseline238 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 130
TECHIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at 6-month follow-up175 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 123
TECHIBD-IBS Symptom SeverityScore at 12-month follow-up179 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 125
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of IBD-IBS symptom severity does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.05Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Patient Engagement

Patient engagement was measured using the validated IBD Self-Efficacy Scale (IBD-SES) which assesses one's confidence level in managing stress and emotions, managing medical care, managing symptoms and disease, and maintaining remission. The IBD-SES measures self-management activities across four subscales (Stress and Emotions; Medical Care; Symptoms and Disease; Remission), with higher scores indicating greater confidence in self-management. Responses for each question are summed to produce one overall and four subscale scores. The total score range is between 29 and 290, with 29 indicating the lowest level of self-efficacy and 290 indicating the highest. Each item is scored 1-10, with 1 being assigned for responses of Not confident at all and a score of 10 assigned for responses of Totally confident. Only total scores are reported.

Time frame: Compare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMPatient EngagementScore at baseline161 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 40
TEAMPatient EngagementScore at 6-month follow-up174 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 47.5
TEAMPatient EngagementScore at 12-month follow-up178 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 54
TECHPatient EngagementScore at 6-month follow-up178 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 46.9
TECHPatient EngagementScore at baseline157 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 35.8
TECHPatient EngagementScore at 12-month follow-up178 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 49.7
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of self-efficacy does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.37Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Quality of Life

Quality of life was evaluated using the Short Quality of Life in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ), a validated tool which measures physical, social, and emotional health-related quality of life (QOL) for patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. On a 7-point scale, lower scores correspond with a lower perceived QOL, while higher scores represent a higher perceived QOL. Responses for each question are summed for a total score between 10 and 70, with 10 reflecting poor QOL and 70 reflecting high QOL. Each item is scored 1-7, with 1 being assigned for responses indicating the highest severity of symptoms, and 7 being assigned for those reflecting the lowest severity of symptoms. Only total scores are reported.

Time frame: Compare at baseline, 6-month and 12-month for any changes

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
TEAMQuality of LifeScore at baseline37.7 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.7
TEAMQuality of LifeScore at 6-month follow-up42.6 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12
TEAMQuality of LifeScore at 12-month follow-up43.0 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.5
TECHQuality of LifeScore at baseline35.5 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.7
TECHQuality of LifeScore at 6-month follow-up41.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.9
TECHQuality of LifeScore at 12-month follow-up43.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.4
Comparison: Null hypothesis: The trajectory of quality of life does not differ by treatment group.p-value: 0.06Mixed Models Analysis

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026