Understanding Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis
Understanding Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis - a Randomized, Controlled, Double Blind Trial
What it found
A paper reports the results; we have not read it yet. See Papers below.
What was tested
Treatment tested
- Understanding MRI in MS (website)
Compared with
- Control website
What it measured
Main measures
Magnetic resonance imaging risk knowledge questionnaire 2.0 (MRI-RIKNO 2.0)
2 weeks
MRI lesions
Other measures (5)
Emotions and attitude towards magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-EMA)
Baseline, 2 weeks
MRI lesionsControl preference scale (CPS)
Baseline, 2 weeks, after patient-physician encounter (i.e. 4 weeks to 6 months after baseline)
Threat by MS
baseline, 2 weeks
Mood and sleepHospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)
Baseline, 2 weeks
Mood and sleepMultifocal Approach to Sharing in Shared Decision Making (MAPPIN'SDM)
after patient-physician-encounter (i.e. 4 weeks to 6 months after baseline)
Who could take part
Relapsing MS · 18 to 65
Show the full criteria
Inclusion criteria
* 18 years 65 years * MRI within 6 weeks to 6 months * internet access AND * diagnosis of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) according to the McDonald criteria (Thompson et al., 2018), \<10 years disease duration + active disease course (i.e. therapy change or new T2 lesion within the previous year) OR * clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) (with at least one MS-typical T2 lesion)
Exclusion criteria
* diagnosis of secondary-progressive MS * diagnosis of primary-progressive MS * diagnosis or suspected central nervous system disease other than MS * severe cognitive deficit * major psychiatric illness * patients who are related to medical personnel
As registered. Criteria can change, so ask the trial team or your neurologist.
About this trial
In the sponsor's words
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results play a major role in the lives of people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). Even though MRI is used for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy control, pwMS' knowledge concerning this complex matter is scarce. Without adequate disease-specific knowledge, pwMS cannot truly make an informed choice when considering their MRI results (e.g. necessity of future MRI scans or therapy change). The investigators have developed an innovative, evidence-based and interactive online education tool called "Understanding MRI in MS", which incorporates all relevant information about MRI in MS and its implications in disease management. In this randomized, controlled and double-blind trial the tool's effect on MRI-specific knowledge, self-perceived competence and involvement in medical decision, that are based on MRI results will be assessed.
Papers
Results
Assessing the effect of an evidence-based patient online educational tool for people with multiple sclerosis called UMIMS-understanding magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.Trials · 2020
Background
Brand J, Kopke S, Kasper J, Rahn A, Backhus I, Poettgen J, Stellmann JP, Siemonsen S, Heesen C. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis--patients' experiences, information interests and responses to an education programme. PLoS One. 2014 Nov 21;9(11):e113252. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113252. eCollection 2014.Background
Gaissmaier W, Giese H, Galesic M, Garcia-Retamero R, Kasper J, Kleiter I, Meuth SG, Kopke S, Heesen C. Numeracy of multiple sclerosis patients: A comparison of patients from the PERCEPT study to a German probabilistic sample. Patient Educ Couns. 2018 Jan;101(1):74-78. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.07.018. Epub 2017 Jul 17.Background
Heesen C, Kasper J, Fischer K, Kopke S, Rahn A, Backhus I, Poettgen J, Vahter L, Drulovic J, Van Nunen A, Beckmann Y, Liethmann K, Giordano A, Fulcher G, Solari A; AutoMS-group. Risk Knowledge in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (RIKNO 1.0)--Development of an Outcome Instrument for Educational Interventions. PLoS One. 2015 Oct 2;10(10):e0138364. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138364. eCollection 2015.Background
Heesen C, Kasper J, Kopke S, Richter T, Segal J, Muhlhauser I. Informed shared decision making in multiple sclerosis--inevitable or impossible? J Neurol Sci. 2007 Aug 15;259(1-2):109-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.074. Epub 2007 Apr 2.Background
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M; Medical Research Council Guidance. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655.Background
Boeije HR, Janssens AC. 'It might happen or it might not': how patients with multiple sclerosis explain their perception of prognostic risk. Soc Sci Med. 2004 Aug;59(4):861-8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.11.040.Background
Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997 Fall;29(3):21-43.Background
Riechel C, Alegiani AC, Kopke S, Kasper J, Rosenkranz M, Thomalla G, Heesen C. Subjective and objective knowledge and decisional role preferences in cerebrovascular patients compared to controls. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Aug 2;10:1453-60. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S98342. eCollection 2016.Background
Kasper J, Hoffmann F, Heesen C, Kopke S, Geiger F. MAPPIN'SDM--the multifocal approach to sharing in shared decision making. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e34849. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034849. Epub 2012 Apr 13.
Loading reviews and guidelines…
History
Started
Mar 2019
Main results due
Dec 2022
Finished
Dec 2022