Using Videos in Advance Care Planning for Patients With Advanced Cancer

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
To compare the decision making of subjects with advanced cancer having a verbal advance care planning discussion compared to subjects using a video.

Detailed Description
-----------------
A.1. Aim 1: To recruit 150 subjects with advanced cancer and randomly assign these subjects to one of two advance care planning (ACP) modalities: 1. a video visually depicting CPR (intervention) or 2. a verbal narrative describing the CPR. Hypothesis 1: It is feasible to recruit and randomize 150 subjects with advanced cancer. A.2. Aim 2: To compare the care preferences for CPR among 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention. Hypothesis 2: Subjects randomized to the video intervention will be significantly more likely to opt NOT to have CPR compared to those randomized to the verbal narrative. A.3. Aim 3: To compare knowledge assessment of CPR for 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention. Hypothesis 3: When compared to subjects randomized to the verbal narrative arm, subjects in the video group will have higher knowledge assessment scores when asked questions regarding their understanding of CPR.

Official Title
-----------------
A Pilot Study of Using Video Images in Advance Care Planning in Patients With Advanced Cancer

Conditions
-----------------
Advanced Cancer

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: video decision aid


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: diagnosis of cancer that falls under one of the following: A. All patients with brain cancer, inoperable hepatocellular/bile duct/gallbladder cancer, incurable non-small cell lung carcinoma (wet IIIb or IV), extensive stage small cell lung cancer, inoperable mesothelioma, inoperable pancreatic cancer or; metastatic gastric or esophageal cancer, metastatic melanoma, OR B. Patients with the following cancers, if first-line therapy has failed and limited response is expected to second-line therapy: breast cancer, colorectal cancer, head and neck cancer, leukemia, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, renal cancer, sarcoma, lung cancer, myeloma, or lymphoma, OR C. Less than one year prognosis. ability to provide informed consent, cognitive ability to participate in the study ability to communicate in English. Exclusion Criteria: inability to make decisions, non-English speaking, new patient visit

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 21 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: video decision aid<br>Video decision aid arm | Behavioral: video decision aid<br>* video of CPR<br>|
| No Intervention: Usual Care -- Verbal Description Arm<br>Verbal description of CPR (i.e., without the video). | |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| preferences for CPR | CPR preference after visit to oncologist | within one hour after oncology visit | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| knowledge of CPR | assess knowledge of CPR | baseline and post-intervention | 
| stability of preferences | assess CPR preferences again | after 6-8 weeks | 
| predictors of preferences | predictors of preferences for CPR | post-intervention | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
advanced cancer