Anne Christin Rahn1,2, Lisa Wenzel3,4, Andrea Icks5, Alexander Stahmann6, Jutta Scheiderbauer7, Kristina Grentzenberg3, Markus Vomhof5, Joseph Montalbo5, Tim Friede8, Christoph Heesen3,9, Sascha Köpke4. 1. Institute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. anne.christin.rahn@uni-oldenburg.de. 2. Department of Health Services Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. anne.christin.rahn@uni-oldenburg.de. 3. Institute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Institute of Nursing Science, University Hospital Cologne and Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 5. Institute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, Centre for Health and Society, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. 6. MS Forschungs- und Projektentwicklungs-gGmbH, Hannover, Germany. 7. Stiftung für Selbstbestimmung und Selbstvertretung von MS-Betroffenen, Trier, Germany. 8. Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical, Göttingen, Germany. 9. Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory, degenerative disease of the central nervous system manifesting at first with relapses in about 85% of cases. In Germany, intravenous therapy with high-dose corticosteroids is the treatment standard of acute relapses. The treatment leads to a faster reduction of symptoms in about 25 of 100 treated patients but has no proven long-term benefits over placebo treatment. Intravenous treatment is not superior to oral treatment. Therefore, informed decisions on relapse management are required. An earlier randomised controlled trial showed that evidence-based patient information and education on relapse management leads to more informed decisions and more relapses not treated or treated with oral corticosteroids. This study aims to evaluate whether a web-based relapse management programme will positively change relapse management and strengthen autonomy in people with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: The pragmatic double-blind randomised controlled trial is accompanied by a mixed-methods process evaluation and a health economic evaluation and follows the UK Medical Research Council guidance on developing and evaluating complex interventions. A total of 188 people with possible or relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with ≥ 1 relapse within the last year and/or ≥ 2 relapses within the last 2 years will be recruited and randomised using blocks. The intervention group receives a web- and dialogue-based decision aid on relapse management, a nurse-led webinar and access to a monitored chat forum. The control group receives standard information, which will be made available via the same online platform as the intervention. The primary endpoint is the proportion of relapses not treated or treated with oral corticosteroids. Key secondary endpoints are the annualised relapse rate, decision-making, empowerment, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Facilitators and barriers will be assessed by mixed-methods process evaluation measures. The study ends when 81 relapses have been documented or after 24 months of observation per individual patient. Analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that the intervention will enhance patient empowerment and have a positive impact on patients' relapse management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04233970 . Registered on 18 January 2020.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION:Multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory, degenerative disease of the central nervous system manifesting at first with relapses in about 85% of cases. In Germany, intravenous therapy with high-dose corticosteroids is the treatment standard of acute relapses. The treatment leads to a faster reduction of symptoms in about 25 of 100 treated patients but has no proven long-term benefits over placebo treatment. Intravenous treatment is not superior to oral treatment. Therefore, informed decisions on relapse management are required. An earlier randomised controlled trial showed that evidence-based patient information and education on relapse management leads to more informed decisions and more relapses not treated or treated with oral corticosteroids. This study aims to evaluate whether a web-based relapse management programme will positively change relapse management and strengthen autonomy in people with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: The pragmatic double-blind randomised controlled trial is accompanied by a mixed-methods process evaluation and a health economic evaluation and follows the UK Medical Research Council guidance on developing and evaluating complex interventions. A total of 188 people with possible or relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with ≥ 1 relapse within the last year and/or ≥ 2 relapses within the last 2 years will be recruited and randomised using blocks. The intervention group receives a web- and dialogue-based decision aid on relapse management, a nurse-led webinar and access to a monitored chat forum. The control group receives standard information, which will be made available via the same online platform as the intervention. The primary endpoint is the proportion of relapses not treated or treated with oral corticosteroids. Key secondary endpoints are the annualised relapse rate, decision-making, empowerment, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Facilitators and barriers will be assessed by mixed-methods process evaluation measures. The study ends when 81 relapses have been documented or after 24 months of observation per individual patient. Analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that the intervention will enhance patient empowerment and have a positive impact on patients' relapse management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04233970 . Registered on 18 January 2020.
Authors: K Noyes; A Bajorska; A Chappel; S R Schwid; L R Mehta; B Weinstock-Guttman; R G Holloway; A W Dick Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Paul Browne; Dhia Chandraratna; Ceri Angood; Helen Tremlett; Chris Baker; Bruce V Taylor; Alan J Thompson Journal: Neurology Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Julia E W C van Gemert-Pijnen; Nicol Nijland; Maarten van Limburg; Hans C Ossebaard; Saskia M Kelders; Gunther Eysenbach; Erwin R Seydel Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2011-12-05 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Lisa Wenzel; Christoph Heesen; Julia Peper; Kristina Grentzenberg; Edeltraud Faßhauer; Jutta Scheiderbauer; Frithjof Thale; Björn Meyer; Sascha Köpke; Anne Christin Rahn Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Lisa-Marie Ohle; David Ellenberger; Peter Flachenecker; Tim Friede; Judith Haas; Kerstin Hellwig; Tina Parciak; Clemens Warnke; Friedemann Paul; Uwe K Zettl; Alexander Stahmann Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 4.379