Bronchopulmonary DysplasiaPhase 3NCT00314431
Post-hospitalization Nursing Effectiveness (PHONE) Study
A Phase 3 study testing Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurse in people with Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia and Prematurity, run by Wake Forest University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Based on success with telephone follow up for other groups of medically fragile infants, we designed an innovative model of post-hospital comprehensive and coordinated follow-up for infants with chronic lung disease. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 1 day to 483 days
- Conditions the study is for
- Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Prematurity
- What is being tested?
- Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurse
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 150 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 1996to Aug 2000
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 1 day to 483 days
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Infants were eligible if they were born before 33 weeks gestational age, required supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks gestational age, and were discharged home after neonatal intensive care.
Who cannot join
- Neonates who had major congenital anomalies and/ or had tracheostomy tubes were excluded. Also excluded were families in which the mother did not speak English, because the intervention depended on verbal communication with the nurse specialist, and families who lived more than 150 miles from our clinic because such families typically are referred to regional neonatal center closer to their home.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Wake Forest University School of Medicine
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157
About this study
Official title: Randomized Comparison of Two Models of Post-NICU Care for Preterm Infants With Neonatal Chronic Lung Disease
Based on success with telephone follow up for other groups of medically fragile infants, we designed an innovative model of post-hospital comprehensive and coordinated follow-up for infants with chronic lung disease. In this model, which we refer to as community-based follow-up, medical management was coordinated by a nurse specialist, through frequent telephone contacts with the infants' primary caregiver. This model of follow up care was compared, in a randomized trial, with the more traditional model - multidisciplinary medical center-based care. We hypothesized that community-based care would lead to health and developmental outcomes similar to those observed with center-based care.
Read the detailed description
METHODS Study design A randomized equivalence trial was designed to compare community-based follow up with medical-center based follow up. The primary outcome was assessed at one year adjusted age.
Study participants Infants were recruited in five neonatal intensive care units in northwest North CArolina. These were the only sites providing neonatal intensive care in a twenty-county region in northwest North Carolina. Infants were born between March 1996 and September 1999. Infants were eligible for the study if they were born before 33 weeks gestational age, required supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks gestational age, and were discharged home after neonatal intensive care. Neonates who had major congenital anomalies and/ or had tracheostomy tubes were excluded. Also excluded were families in which the mother did not speak English, because the intervention depended on verbal communication with the nurse specialist, and families who lived more than 150 miles from our clinic because such families typically are referred to regional neonatal center closer to their home.
Randomization A randomization list was prepared by a biostatistician who was not involved in data collection or clinical care of the infants. Lists of randomization assignments, which were kept in a sealed envelope in a locked drawer, were prepared for each of the five sites at which participants were recruited. Randomization assignments were made in blocks sizes of two and four. Once a study participant arrived home from the neonatal intensive care unit, a research assistant uncovered the next assignment on the randomization list, which was kept in a sealed envelope in a locked drawer.
Intervention If the family did not have telephone service at the time of the infant's discharge, a telephone was installed at no cost to the family, within one week of the infant's discharge from the hospital. Research funds were used to reimburse all families for the cost of local phone service for the duration of the study. Families assigned to either intervention could contact the nurse specialist on a toll-free long distance line with voice mail which recorded messages when the phone was not attended.
The intervention team consisted of two neonatologists, a pediatric social worker, and a nurse specialist.
Community-based follow up Telephone contacts were made to the infants' primary caregiver by the nurse specialist twice weekly in the first month after discharge, weekly in months two through four, and monthly thereafter until the infant attained 12 months adjusted age. At each telephone contact, the nurse used a semi-structured format to inquire about the infant's health, community resources utilized by the infant, and potential stressors and sources of support for the family. She also inquired about the infant's medications and feedings. If she judged the infant would benefit from a change in medical management, additional assessments or a subspecialty referral, she discussed the proposed change with one of the two study neonatologists. If there was agreement, the recommendation was communicated to the family and the infant's primary care provider. The nurse specialist also coordinated care for the infant by communicating with home health nurses, public health nurses, early intervention specialists, physical therapists, and pediatric sub-specialists.
Medical center-based follow up For infants who were discharged home on supplemental oxygen, the nurse specialist made a home visit 1 to 2 weeks after discharge. During this visit, the nurse specialist obtained interim medical history, performed physical assessment including pulse oximetry and body weight, reviewed discharge instructions regarding medication dosage and use of durable medical equipment, and answered caregiver's questions about the infant's care. If the nurse specialist had concerns about the medical condition of the infant, she made changes to the plan of care after consultation with the study neonatologist.
All infants assigned to the center-based care group were seen in the regional, high-risk infant multidisciplinary clinic at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. The first clinic visit occurred approximately one month after their discharge. A multidisciplinary team consisting of the social worker, the nurse specialist and the neonatologist obtained detailed interim medical history (feeding, respiratory status, medication history, illnesses and health-services utilization) and performed a complete physical examination. Family stressors and resources were discussed. All infants were scheduled for visits at four, eight, and twelve months adjusted age. In addition, infants who were using supplemental oxygen were seen at an interval of 1-2 months until all of the following criteria were met: 1) their growth rate was 15-30 grams/day, 2) they were no longer using supplemental oxygen or other medications, and 3) they were no longer using a home apnea monitor. At each clinic visit, the infant and parent or guardian were seen individually by the clinic social worker, the nurse specialist for this project, and one of the two neonatologists who conferred as a group and developed a plan of care. This plan was communicated to the family by the nurse specialist.
Communication with primary care providers Within 24 hours after randomization, the principal investigator called the infants' primary care providers to inform them about the study design and that the parents have consented to participate in the study. In the case of infants randomized to community-based care, the primary care provider was given the choice of making the decisions about changes in medical care independently or jointly with the nurse specialist. A copy of a protocol for management of infants with CLD, developed by the study team was mailed to each primary care provider. After each clinic visit (for the center-based group) the primary care provider received a letter describing findings, impressions, and recommendations. Contacts with the primary care physicians of infants randomized to community-based care occurred whenever the nurse specialist believed that a change in care was indicated.
Outcomes assessed during the first year Self-administered questionnaires were used to assess psychosocial status of the family, healthcare utilization and healthcare expenses at baseline, one, four, seven and eleven months. Each time the family completed study questionnaires and when home visits were made, families were given twenty dollars as compensation. At eleven months, a research assistant conducted a home visit and assessed the home using the Caldwell HOME Inventory,27 and the parent-infant interaction using a scale developed by Holditch and Miles.28 Only results of rehospitalization rates during the first year will be presented in this paper.
Outcomes assessed at one year adjusted age All children were evaluated at one year adjusted age at a Development Evaluation Clinic dedicated solely to developmental assessments of high-risk infants. The primary outcome, the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition (BSID-2) Mental Developmental Index (MDI)I, and two secondary outcomes - the BSID Pyschomotor Developmental Index (PDI) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales (VABS) were assessed by child psychologists or psychology graduate students supervised by a child psychologist, who were not aware of the child's intervention group or medical history. After the testing was completed, the psychologist was informed of the infant's gestational age at birth, so that the BSID scores could be corrected for the degree of prematurity. The BSID MDI is a widely used and validated developmental assessment tool to measure cognitive development in the first two years of life. The BSID PDI measures fine and gross motor development.29 The population mean for both the scores is 100 with a standard deviation of 15. Higher score on BSID MDI and PDI represents better cognitive and motor functioning respectively.30 When the BSID MDI/ PDI score was less than 50, then the score was extrapolated as described previously.31
The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are a parent-reported measure of child adaptive development. The scale assesses four domains of adaptive development: communication, daily living skills, socialization, and motor skills. The overall Adaptive Behavior Composite (ABC) is a standard score based on the child's age, with higher scores representing better adaptive functioning. Population mean for ABC is 100 and the standard deviation is 15.32
Anthropometric measurements were performed by a neonatologist, who was aware of the infants' intervention assignment, using a pediatric scale for weight, a length board for length, and a tape measure for head circumference. Growth delay was defined as weight for length less than 5th percentile at one year adjusted age. At 1 year follow-up, a research assistant reviewed each child's clinic chart and noted whether any of the following health conditions or receipt of health-services: cerebral palsy, blindness, hearing impairment, seizure disorder, oxygen requirement, need for tracheostomy tube and ventriculo-peritoneal shunt.
- Conditions
- Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Prematurity
- Being tested
- Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurse
- Keywords
- neonatal chronic lung disease, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, prematurity, telephone follow up, care coordination, children with special health care needs
- Medical subject headings
- Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Premature Birth
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurseProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition
Secondary outcomes (3)
Growth through one year of age
Rehospitalizations in the first year of life
Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Apr 2006 (estimated)
- Study startMay 1996
- Study completionAug 2000
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Bronchopulmonary DysplasiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 150 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Wake Forest University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Thomas M O'Shea, MD, MPH, Principal investigator, Wake Forest University Health Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00314431
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- BG99547
- Other IDs
- R01HS007928
- Status last verified
- Apr 2006
- First submitted
- 11 Apr 2006
- Last updated
- 6 Nov 2017
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Nov 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomized Comparison of Two Models of Post-NICU Care for Preterm Infants With Neonatal Chronic Lung Disease
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00314431
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BG99547
- Conditions
- Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Prematurity
- Keywords
- neonatal chronic lung disease, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, prematurity, telephone follow up, care coordination, children with special health care needs
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 150 participants
- Lead sponsor
- Wake Forest UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 1996
- Study completion
- Aug 2000
- First posted
- 13 Apr 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Based on success with telephone follow up for other groups of medically fragile infants, we designed an innovative model of post-hospital comprehensive and coordinated follow-up for infants with chronic lung disease. In this model, which we refer to as community-based follow-up, medical management was coordinated by a nurse specialist, through frequent telephone contacts with the infants' primary caregiver. This model of follow up care was compared, in a randomized trial, with the more traditional model - multidisciplinary medical center-based care. We hypothesized that community-based care would lead to health and developmental outcomes similar to those observed with center-based care.
Detailed description
METHODS Study design A randomized equivalence trial was designed to compare community-based follow up with medical-center based follow up. The primary outcome was assessed at one year adjusted age.
Study participants Infants were recruited in five neonatal intensive care units in northwest North CArolina. These were the only sites providing neonatal intensive care in a twenty-county region in northwest North Carolina. Infants were born between March 1996 and September 1999. Infants were eligible for the study if they were born before 33 weeks gestational age, required supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks gestational age, and were discharged home after neonatal intensive care. Neonates who had major congenital anomalies and/ or had tracheostomy tubes were excluded. Also excluded were families in which the mother did not speak English, because the intervention depended on verbal communication with the nurse specialist, and families who lived more than 150 miles from our clinic because such families typically are referred to regional neonatal center closer to their home.
Randomization A randomization list was prepared by a biostatistician who was not involved in data collection or clinical care of the infants. Lists of randomization assignments, which were kept in a sealed envelope in a locked drawer, were prepared for each of the five sites at which participants were recruited. Randomization assignments were made in blocks sizes of two and four. Once a study participant arrived home from the neonatal intensive care unit, a research assistant uncovered the next assignment on the randomization list, which was kept in a sealed envelope in a locked drawer.
Intervention If the family did not have telephone service at the time of the infant's discharge, a telephone was installed at no cost to the family, within one week of the infant's discharge from the hospital. Research funds were used to reimburse all families for the cost of local phone service for the duration of the study. Families assigned to either intervention could contact the nurse specialist on a toll-free long distance line with voice mail which recorded messages when the phone was not attended.
The intervention team consisted of two neonatologists, a pediatric social worker, and a nurse specialist.
Community-based follow up Telephone contacts were made to the infants' primary caregiver by the nurse specialist twice weekly in the first month after discharge, weekly in months two through four, and monthly thereafter until the infant attained 12 months adjusted age. At each telephone contact, the nurse used a semi-structured format to inquire about the infant's health, community resources utilized by the infant, and potential stressors and sources of support for the family. She also inquired about the infant's medications and feedings. If she judged the infant would benefit from a change in medical management, additional assessments or a subspecialty referral, she discussed the proposed change with one of the two study neonatologists. If there was agreement, the recommendation was communicated to the family and the infant's primary care provider. The nurse specialist also coordinated care for the infant by communicating with home health nurses, public health nurses, early intervention specialists, physical therapists, and pediatric sub-specialists.
Medical center-based follow up For infants who were discharged home on supplemental oxygen, the nurse specialist made a home visit 1 to 2 weeks after discharge. During this visit, the nurse specialist obtained interim medical history, performed physical assessment including pulse oximetry and body weight, reviewed discharge instructions regarding medication dosage and use of durable medical equipment, and answered caregiver's questions about the infant's care. If the nurse specialist had concerns about the medical condition of the infant, she made changes to the plan of care after consultation with the study neonatologist.
All infants assigned to the center-based care group were seen in the regional, high-risk infant multidisciplinary clinic at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. The first clinic visit occurred approximately one month after their discharge. A multidisciplinary team consisting of the social worker, the nurse specialist and the neonatologist obtained detailed interim medical history (feeding, respiratory status, medication history, illnesses and health-services utilization) and performed a complete physical examination. Family stressors and resources were discussed. All infants were scheduled for visits at four, eight, and twelve months adjusted age. In addition, infants who were using supplemental oxygen were seen at an interval of 1-2 months until all of the following criteria were met: 1) their growth rate was 15-30 grams/day, 2) they were no longer using supplemental oxygen or other medications, and 3) they were no longer using a home apnea monitor. At each clinic visit, the infant and parent or guardian were seen individually by the clinic social worker, the nurse specialist for this project, and one of the two neonatologists who conferred as a group and developed a plan of care. This plan was communicated to the family by the nurse specialist.
Communication with primary care providers Within 24 hours after randomization, the principal investigator called the infants' primary care providers to inform them about the study design and that the parents have consented to participate in the study. In the case of infants randomized to community-based care, the primary care provider was given the choice of making the decisions about changes in medical care independently or jointly with the nurse specialist. A copy of a protocol for management of infants with CLD, developed by the study team was mailed to each primary care provider. After each clinic visit (for the center-based group) the primary care provider received a letter describing findings, impressions, and recommendations. Contacts with the primary care physicians of infants randomized to community-based care occurred whenever the nurse specialist believed that a change in care was indicated.
Outcomes assessed during the first year Self-administered questionnaires were used to assess psychosocial status of the family, healthcare utilization and healthcare expenses at baseline, one, four, seven and eleven months. Each time the family completed study questionnaires and when home visits were made, families were given twenty dollars as compensation. At eleven months, a research assistant conducted a home visit and assessed the home using the Caldwell HOME Inventory,27 and the parent-infant interaction using a scale developed by Holditch and Miles.28 Only results of rehospitalization rates during the first year will be presented in this paper.
Outcomes assessed at one year adjusted age All children were evaluated at one year adjusted age at a Development Evaluation Clinic dedicated solely to developmental assessments of high-risk infants. The primary outcome, the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition (BSID-2) Mental Developmental Index (MDI)I, and two secondary outcomes - the BSID Pyschomotor Developmental Index (PDI) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales (VABS) were assessed by child psychologists or psychology graduate students supervised by a child psychologist, who were not aware of the child's intervention group or medical history. After the testing was completed, the psychologist was informed of the infant's gestational age at birth, so that the BSID scores could be corrected for the degree of prematurity. The BSID MDI is a widely used and validated developmental assessment tool to measure cognitive development in the first two years of life. The BSID PDI measures fine and gross motor development.29 The population mean for both the scores is 100 with a standard deviation of 15. Higher score on BSID MDI and PDI represents better cognitive and motor functioning respectively.30 When the BSID MDI/ PDI score was less than 50, then the score was extrapolated as described previously.31
The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are a parent-reported measure of child adaptive development. The scale assesses four domains of adaptive development: communication, daily living skills, socialization, and motor skills. The overall Adaptive Behavior Composite (ABC) is a standard score based on the child's age, with higher scores representing better adaptive functioning. Population mean for ABC is 100 and the standard deviation is 15.32
Anthropometric measurements were performed by a neonatologist, who was aware of the infants' intervention assignment, using a pediatric scale for weight, a length board for length, and a tape measure for head circumference. Growth delay was defined as weight for length less than 5th percentile at one year adjusted age. At 1 year follow-up, a research assistant reviewed each child's clinic chart and noted whether any of the following health conditions or receipt of health-services: cerebral palsy, blindness, hearing impairment, seizure disorder, oxygen requirement, need for tracheostomy tube and ventriculo-peritoneal shunt.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 1 day to 483 days
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Infants were eligible if they were born before 33 weeks gestational age, required supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks gestational age, and were discharged home after neonatal intensive care.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Neonates who had major congenital anomalies and/ or had tracheostomy tubes were excluded. Also excluded were families in which the mother did not speak English, because the intervention depended on verbal communication with the nurse specialist, and families who lived more than 150 miles from our clinic because such families typically are referred to regional neonatal center closer to their home.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurse | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition
3 secondary outcomes
Growth through one year of age
Rehospitalizations in the first year of life
Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Nov 2017.
Related trials for Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia
Not yet recruiting
Strap To Reduce Apnea in Preterm Infants: A Randomized Crossover Trial
Apnea of Prematurity, Intermittent Hypoxemia
Recruiting
Ventilator Pressure and Optimization of Compliance and Hemodynamics
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Pulmonary Hypertension Due to Lung Diseases and Hypoxia
RecruitingPhase 4
Impact of Higher Zinc Supplementation on Neonatal Weight Velocity
Extreme Prematurity,Extremely Low Birthweight, BPD - Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia
RecruitingObservational study
The Correlation Between Red Cell Transfusion and Complications of Prematurity
Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP), Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD)
Recruiting
Restricted Versus Liberal Fluid Intake for Prevention of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Thomas M O'Shea, MD, MPH principal investigator
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Care coordination by telephone contacts with a nurse in people with Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia and Prematurity, run by Wake Forest University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Nov 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Second Edition. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 6 Nov 2017.