50 and older, any sex, with Communication. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.
Results — posted to ClinicalTrials.gov
Per-arm endpoint measurements with 95% confidence intervals where reported. Source: trial results section.
Family Member-reported Quality of End of Life Communication (QOC) Received From Study SurgeonPrimary· 72 hours after trauma unit admission
Family member-reported quality of end of life communication will be measured by the 7-item end of life subscale of the Quality of Communication scale. The QOC is a validated self-report instrument. The average score is given with a possible range of 0-10. Higher scores indicate higher perceived quality of end of life communication
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
6.6
± 2.6
Usual Care
4.5
± 2.5
Family Member-reported General Communication (QOC) Received From Study SurgeonPrimary· 72 hours after trauma unit admission
Family member-reported general quality of end communication will be measured by the 6-item general communication subscale of the Quality of Communication scale. The QOC is a validated self-report instrument. The average score is given with a possible range of 0-10. Higher scores indicate higher perceived quality of communication
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
8.5
± 1.9
Usual Care
8.3
± 1.72
Nurse-reported Quality of End of Life Communication (QOC) Received From Study SurgeonSecondary· 72 hours after trauma unit admission
Nurse-reported quality of end of life communication will be measured by the 7-item Quality of Communication scale, end of life subscale, clinician version. The QOC is a validated self-report instrument. The average score is given with a possible range of 0-10.Higher scores indicate higher perceived quality of communication
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
6
± 2.79
Usual Care
4.1
± 2.3
Nurse-reported General Quality of Communication (QOC) Received From Study SurgeonSecondary· 72 hours after trauma unit admission
Nurse-reported general quality of communication will be measured by the 6-item Quality of Communication scale, general communication subscale, clinician version. The QOC is a validated self-report instrument. The average score is given with a possible range of 0-10. Higher scores indicate higher perceived quality of life communication
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
7.7
± 1.96
Usual Care
6.7
± 1.97
Family-reported Communication and Care CoordinationSecondary· 10 days after trauma unit admission
Family-reported communication and care coordination as measured by the 30-item Family Inpatient Communication Survey (FICS). The FICS is a validated instrument. Scores on this instrument may range from 30 to 150 and higher scores indicate greater satisfaction with ICU care
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
114.5
± 22.98
Usual Care
113.8
± 20.87
Family-reported Goal Concordant CareSecondary· 10 days after trauma unit admission
Family-reported goal concordant care will be assessed by 2 survey questions taken from the SUPPORT study (Question 1: If you had to make a choice at this time, would you prefer a course of treatment for your loved one that focuses on extending life as much as possible, even if it means having more pain and discomfort, or would you want a plan of care that focuses on relieving pain and discomfort as much as possible, even if that means not living as long? Question 2: Would you say that your loved one's current medical care is more focused on extending life as much as possible, even if it means
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
16
Usual Care
15
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
8
Usual Care
7
Patient-reported Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL)Secondary· 30 days after trauma unit admission
Patient-reported trauma quality of life (TQoL) as measured by the 43 Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL) survey. The TQoL is a validated measure. Scores may range from 41-172. Higher scores indicate better quality of life
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
115.3
± 17.91
Usual Care
126.7
± 18.12
Family-reported Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL)Secondary· 30 days after trauma unit admission
Family-reported trauma quality of life (TQoL) as measured by the 43 Trauma Quality of Life (TQoL) survey, adapted for use with family members. The TQoL is a validated measure. Scores may range from 41-172. Higher scores indicate better quality of life
Group
Value
95% CI
Best Case/Worst Case Communication Tool
102.6
± 29.63
Usual Care
121.7
± 12.56
Trauma Nurse-reported Moral DistressSecondary· Start of study and 30 months after study commencement
Trauma unit staff-reported moral distress will be measured by the 21-item Moral Distress Scale-Revised (MDS-R), nurse version. Scores many range from 0 to 336 and higher scores indicate greater moral distress
Group
Value
95% CI
Pre-intervention Survey
79.48
± 47.44
Post-intervention Survey
82.56
± 40.86
Trauma Physician-reported Moral DistressSecondary· Start of study and 30 months after study commencement
Trauma unit staff-reported moral distress will be measured by the 21-item Moral Distress Scale-Revised (MDS-R), physician version. Scores many range from 0 to 336 and higher scores indicate greater moral distress
Group
Value
95% CI
Pre-intervention Survey
61.03
± 32.32
Post-intervention Survey
51.42
± 24.03
Sponsor's own description
The purpose of this study is to test the effect of the "Best Case/Worse Case" (BC/WC) communication tool on the quality of communication with older patients admitted to two trauma units. The intervention was developed and tested with acute care surgical patients at the University of Wisconsin (UW) and we are now testing whether the intervention will work in a different setting. We will test the intervention with severely injured older adults at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) and Parkland Memorial Hospital (PMH) at the University of Texas Southwestern (UTS). In the first year, UTS/PMH and OHSU will recruit and enroll 50 patients in the control arm (total, for both sites) and train trauma surgeons to use the best case/worst case tool. In the second year, UTS/PMH and OHSU will recruit and enroll 50 patients in the intervention arm (total, for both sites). UW will compare survey-reported and chart-derived measures before and after clinicians learn to use the best case/worst case tool.
Publications & conference data
1 peer-reviewed publication reference this trial (live from Europe PMC):
Publications: Europe PMC API search by NCT ID, retrieved 10 June 2026
Drug + disease cross-links: matched in real time against Drug Landscape's normalised drug + company + condition tables
Sponsor: as reported to ClinicalTrials.gov by University of Wisconsin, Madison
Last refreshed: 4 November 2025
Drug Landscape aggregates and links these public records for informational use only. Always verify against the primary source before clinical or regulatory decisions. Canonical URL: https://druglandscape.com/trial/NCT03188055.