Skip to content

Improving Decision-Making Encounters in Lung Cancer Using a Low-Literacy Conversation Tool

Improving Decision-Making Encounters in Lung Cancer (I DECide) II: A Randomized Control Trial Of A Low-Literacy Conversation Tool

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05407168
Acronym
iDECIDE
Enrollment
237
Registered
2022-06-07
Start date
2022-10-31
Completion date
2027-12-31
Last updated
2026-09-02

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

Conditions

Lung Carcinoma

Brief summary

This clinical trial evaluates the effectiveness of a conversation tool on patient-centered health and decision-making outcomes in patients with lung cancer making treatment decisions. This research is being conducted to help doctors understand the information patients need to participate in shared decision-making about their lung cancer treatment options. The focus of this research is to study how patients choose lung cancer treatment options and the information needed to make that choice, with a focus on patients with lower health literacy.

Detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. Conduct a randomized, controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a conversation tool on patient-centered health and decision-making outcomes among patients making lung cancer treatment decisions. A subset of participants from control and intervention groups will also have their clinic conversations with providers recorded II. Conduct in-depth, semi-structured qualitative audio or video recorded interviews among a subset of Aim 1 participants. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 groups. GROUP I: Patients review decision aid. GROUP II: Patients receive standard of care. After completion of study intervention, patients are followed up at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months.

Interventions

OTHERBest Practice

Receive standard of care

OTHERHealth Promotion and Education

View decision aid

OTHERQuestionnaire Administration

Ancillary studies

Sponsors

OHSU Knight Cancer Institute
Lead SponsorOTHER
Oregon Health and Science University
CollaboratorOTHER
American Cancer Society, Inc.
CollaboratorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 99 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* AIM 1: Suspected lung cancer * AIM 1: English fluency * AIM 1: \> 6-month life expectancy * AIM 1: Score of ≥ 3 on the cognitive impairment screener * AIM 2 PARTICIPANTS: Participation in Aim 1 * AIM 2 CLINICIANS: Discussing lung cancer treatment decisions with Aim 1 participants

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Decision ConflictUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale, which contains 16 items. Higher scores indicate higher decisional conflict.
Efficacy of a conversation tool on patients' knowledge of lung cancerUp 6 monthsWill be assessed using nine questions from previously validated measures.
Satisfaction with Communication/Confidence in DecisionUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the 20-item COMRADE scale. Higher scores indicate better outcomes.
Self-EfficacyUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the Decision Self-Efficacy Scale which contains 11 items. Higher scores indicate higher self-efficacy.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
FACT-LUp to 6 months.Quality of Life will be assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -- Lung scale. This scale has 27 items. Higher scores indicate higher quality of life.
Depression/AnxietyUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the 4 item Patient Health Questionnaire for Anxiety and Depression scale. Scores greater than or equal to 3 on the first two questions suggest anxiety, and scores greater than or equal to 3 on the last two questions suggest depression.
Participation in Decision-MakingUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the 2-item Control Preferences Scale. Answers of 1 or 2 on both items are categorized as "patient controlled", answers of 3 are categorized as "shared", and answers of 4 or 5 are categorized as "physician-controlled."
Decision RegretUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the 5-item Decision Regret Scale. Higher scores indicate high regret.
Quality of CommunicationUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the \~30 item Patient Assessment of cancer Communication Experiences scale. Higher scores indicate higher perceived quality of communication.
Number of Palliative Care ReferralsUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed by conducting chart review
Treatment Decision-Making ConcordanceUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed by observing the treatment received and the treatment most aligned with responses to the conversation tool. If the treatment received is the same treatment the patient preferred according to the conversation tool, the treatment decision will be considered concordant.
AcceptabilityUp to 6 monthsWill be assessed using the Ottawa Acceptability scale for patients in the intervention group only.

Countries

United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORDonald R Sullivan, MD, MA, MCR

OHSU Knight Cancer Institute

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Sep 3, 2026