AzTrials
AzTrials

HIV/AIDSNCT04147832

Epividian / AHF: Positive Pathways - HIV Retention in Care

An observational study of HIV/AIDS, run by Epividian at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) combined with enhanced patient contact to retain HIV+ patients in care with AIDS Healthcare Foundation. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
HIV/AIDS
What is being tested?
Alert to provider
How many people
10,521 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
5 Oct 2020to 31 Jul 2021
Phase
Observational
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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patients with HIV-1 diagnosis who are in care at AHF and seen at least once in the last 2 years.

Who may be able to join

  • HIV-1+
  • 18 years old or older
  • Any sex
  • Seen at least once in a US-based AHF clinic in the last 2 years with care documented in the EHR

Who cannot join

  • Patients known to have left the practice
  • Patients who choose not to be contacted about their care via telephone

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • AHF

    Los Angeles, California, 90028

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Epividian, Inc. and AIDS Healthcare Foundation: Positive Pathways - HIV Retention in Care RIC-20190212 (Pro00037143)

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) combined with enhanced patient contact to retain HIV+ patients in care with AIDS Healthcare Foundation. Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of having the patient's primary caregiver (or dedicated case manager) telephone the patient when the patient is identified as a significant risk to loss of follow-up (at-risk patients) based upon pre-defined criteria. The secondary objective Gain a better understanding about the implementation of the study's procedures in clinical practice by evaluating survey responses delivered to participating healthcare providers and AHF staff members engaging with the study's intervention.

Read the detailed description

Retention in care and re-engagement in care is a primary concern in HIV treatment today and a major obstacle in the US to reach the UNAIDS 90-90-90 goal [1]. The U.S. CDC supports the use of HIV surveillance data to identify not-in-care (NIC) patients and re-link them to care (Data-to-Care). The optimal strategy for identifying patients for Data-to-Care is unknown. It has been postulated that by increasing follow up of high-risk patients not meeting the retention in care measures, the number of people living with HIV being retained in care may be increased by 10%.

Multiple HIV clinics within the AHF organization in the US are eligible for study participation. "Primary" HIV provider will be defined as the primary physician or advanced care practitioner following a patient, as recorded in their respective EHRs and identified through CHORUS, a CDSS developed by Epividian. The CDSS will track patient case status as active or inactive (loss to follow-up, transferred medical care, or deceased). Providers will be informed of the study and sites will be contracted to participate in this collaborative research study.

The CDSS will generate alerts to the providers warning of suboptimal patient attendance among the population. The alerts will be generated using the following four criteria of at-risk of loss to follow-up:

  • At Risk #1: No visit in the previous 4 months and no scheduled appointment in the subsequent 2 months.
  • High Risk #2: Single appointment in the previous year, a missed appointment in the previous month and no scheduled appointment in the next 2 months.
  • High Risk #3: Those with 2 missed sequential appointments, and no scheduled appointment in the subsequent 7 days.
  • High Risk #4: Those with an attended appointment >3 months ago and their most recent viral load >1000 copies/ml.
Conditions
HIV/AIDS
Being tested
Alert to provider
Medical subject headings
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Alert to providerOther

    Provider will receive an alert of sub-optimal patient attendance using 4 rules.

Study groups in NCT04147832
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
HIV-1HIV-1+, males, females, transgender, ≥18 years of age, seen at any AHF clinic within the last two years and whose care is documented in the AHF electronic health records system.
Receives: Other: Alert to provider

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Rate of Kept Appointments

    Pre and post-baseline rate of patients who attended their scheduled office visits.

    Measured: 16 months, 01-Nov-2019 to 30-Apr-2021

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Viral suppression

    Proportion of patients with an undetectable viral load defined as patients with a viral load <50 copies/mL out of all patients seen at the practice in the past 2 years

    Measured: 16 months, 01-Nov-2019 to 30-Apr-2021

  2. Ranked Scoring of Implementation effectiveness

    Evaluation of healthcare providers' survey responses regarding implementation context of appropriateness, feasibility, adoption, appropriateness and effectiveness. With providers' scores ranked 1 (lowest/worst) to 5 (highest/best), will report pre and post-baseline averages and distributions of scores.

    Measured: 16 months, 01-Nov-2019 to 30-Apr-2021

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted1 Nov 2019
  2. Study start5 Oct 2020
  3. Primary completion31 Jul 2021
  4. Study completion31 Jul 2021

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
10,521 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04147832
Sponsor's protocol ID
Pro00037143
Status last verified
Aug 2021
First submitted
30 Oct 2019
Last updated
25 Feb 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Kazanjian P. UNAIDS 90-90-90 Campaign to End the AIDS Epidemic in Historic Perspective. Milbank Q. 2017 Jun;95(2):408-439. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12265.

    PubMed 28589602
  • Bakken S. An informatics infrastructure is essential for evidence-based practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001 May-Jun;8(3):199-201. doi: 10.1136/jamia.2001.0080199.

    PubMed 11320064
  • Bates DW, Gawande AA. Improving safety with information technology. N Engl J Med. 2003 Jun 19;348(25):2526-34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa020847. No abstract available.

    PubMed 12815139
  • Bakken S, Cimino JJ, Hripcsak G. Promoting patient safety and enabling evidence-based practice through informatics. Med Care. 2004 Feb;42(2 Suppl):II49-56. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000109125.00113.f4.

    PubMed 14734942
  • Jenders RA, Osheroff JA, Sittig DF, Pifer EA, Teich JM. Recommendations for clinical decision support deployment: synthesis of a roundtable of medical directors of information systems. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007 Oct 11;2007:359-63.

    PubMed 18693858
  • Schulman J, Kuperman GJ, Kharbanda A, Kaushal R. Discovering how to think about a hospital patient information system by struggling to evaluate it: a committee's journal. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007 Sep-Oct;14(5):537-41. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2436. Epub 2007 Jun 28.

    PubMed 17600095
  • Middleton B, Hammond WE, Brennan PF, Cooper GF. Accelerating U.S. EHR adoption: how to get there from here. recommendations based on the 2004 ACMI retreat. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005 Jan-Feb;12(1):13-9. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1669. Epub 2004 Oct 18.

    PubMed 15492028
  • Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano MP, Devereaux PJ, Beyene J, Sam J, Haynes RB. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005 Mar 9;293(10):1223-38. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1223.

    PubMed 15755945
  • Poon EG, Wald J, Bates DW, Middleton B, Kuperman GJ, Gandhi TK. Supporting patient care beyond the clinical encounter: three informatics innovations from partners health care. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003;2003:1072.

    PubMed 14728575
  • Bakken S, Roberts WD, Chen E, Dilone J, Lee NJ, Mendonca E, Markatou M. PDA-based informatics strategies for tobacco use screening and smoking cessation management: a case study. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 2):1447-51.

    PubMed 17911954
  • Bindoff IK, Tenni PC, Peterson GM, Kang BH, Jackson SL. Development of an intelligent decision support system for medication review. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007 Feb;32(1):81-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2007.00801.x.

    PubMed 17286791
  • Dickey J, Girard DE, Geheb MA, Cassel CK. Using systems-based practice to integrate education and clinical services. Med Teach. 2004 Aug;26(5):428-34. doi: 10.1080/01421590410001730967.

    PubMed 15369883
  • Grant RW, Wald JS, Poon EG, Schnipper JL, Gandhi TK, Volk LA, Middleton B. Design and implementation of a web-based patient portal linked to an ambulatory care electronic health record: patient gateway for diabetes collaborative care. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2006 Oct;8(5):576-86. doi: 10.1089/dia.2006.8.576.

    PubMed 17037972
  • Hsieh TC, Kuperman GJ, Jaggi T, Hojnowski-Diaz P, Fiskio J, Williams DH, Bates DW, Gandhi TK. Characteristics and consequences of drug allergy alert overrides in a computerized physician order entry system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004 Nov-Dec;11(6):482-91. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1556. Epub 2004 Aug 6.

    PubMed 15298998
  • Lester WT, Ashburner JM, Grant RW, Chueh HC, Barry MJ, Atlas SJ. Mammography FastTrack: an intervention to facilitate reminders for breast cancer screening across a heterogeneous multi-clinic primary care network. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Mar-Apr;16(2):187-95. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2813. Epub 2008 Dec 11.

    PubMed 19074304

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of HIV/AIDS, run by Epividian 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 4 inclusion and 2 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 25 Feb 2025. 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.

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?

Rate of Kept Appointments (time frame: 16 months, 01-Nov-2019 to 30-Apr-2021). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04147832, which also lists 27 linked publications.

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 25 Feb 2025.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in
Clinical Trial NCT04147832 | AzTrials