Randomized trial of a web-based nurse education intervention to increase discussion of clinical trials

Training to Increase Minority Enrollment in Lupus Clinical Trials With Community Engagement: Enhancing Lupus Clinical Trial Recruitment Through Provider and Community Health Worker Engagement

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates the effectiveness of the Training to Increase Minority Enrollment in Lupus Clinical Trials with Community Engagement (TIMELY) program on enhancing referrals of underrepresented patients to lupus clinical trials. TIMELY leverages two existing American College of Rheumatology online educational initiatives: Materials to Increase Minority Involvement in Clinical Trials (MIMICT), a continuing medical education activity for health care providers, and the community health worker (CHW) Lupus Clinical Trials Training (LuCTT). TIMELY introduced a unique roundtable meeting format to build on the existing online educational programs and facilitate discussions between local clinical trial sites and provider and CHW participants.

METHODS

This study used an online pretest and posttest design to assess changes in theory-based behavioral predictors of lupus clinical trial referrals and engagement (ie, knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and intentions) among providers and CHWs. Participants completed MIMICT or LuCTT and then were eligible to participate in roundtable meetings. Paired t-tests were used to assess changes in composite scores before and after the intervention for each of the outcomes.

RESULTS

The final sample included 40 providers and 18 CHWs. Knowledge scores increased significantly for both providers (P < 0.01) and CHWs (P < 0.001) on completion of MIMICT and LuCTT, respectively. After participating in the TIMELY roundtable, providers' composite scores for self-efficacy and intentions significantly increased (P < 0.001). Provider self-efficacy gains were sustained at three months' follow-up (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These promising findings highlight the potential and opportunities for the TIMELY program to improve behavioral predictors of trial referrals, including CHW knowledge and providers' knowledge, self-efficacy, and intentions to refer underrepresented patients to lupus clinical trials.

Navigating the challenges of clinical trial professionals in the healthcare sector

Clinical trials (CTs) are essential for medical advancements but face significant challenges, particularly in professional training and role clarity. Principal investigators, clinical research coordinators (CRCs), nurses, clinical trial pharmacists, and monitors are key players. Each faces unique challenges, such as maintaining protocol compliance, managing investigational products, and ensuring data integrity. Clinical trials' complexity and evolving nature demand specialized and ongoing training for these professionals. Addressing these challenges requires clear role delineation, continuous professional development, and supportive workplace environments to improve retention and trial outcomes. Enhanced training programs and a collaborative approach are essential for the successful conduct of clinical trials and the advancement of medical research.

Development of a Japanese Scale that Evaluates the Level of Nursing Support Provided to Patients for Decision-Making in Cancer Clinical Trials

Clinical nurses need learning programs that are useful in nursing support for patients' decision-making (NSPDM) regarding cancer clinical trials (CCTs). The usefulness of the learning program can be evaluated if the practices of NSPDM before and after participation in the learning program can be compared. We developed a scale to measure the level of self-assessed NSPDM regarding participation in a CCT. Thirty-two items of scale were developed in Japanese based on previous literature. Based on the results of a pilot study, items with similar meanings were removed and the validity of the 26 scale items was statistically examined in terms of construct validity and reliability. The study population was clinical nurses and included clinical research nurses. We received 102 valid responses from clinical nurses. Based on the bias of the boxplot distribution and the ceiling and floor effects for the items analysis of the 26-item draft scale, 17 items remained. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed that the scale consisted of three subscales and 17 items. Regarding fit indices of the model, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), adjusted GFI (AGFI), comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean square error of application (RMSEA) were 0.775, 0.704, 0.477, and 0.081, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the overall scale was 0.951, with subscales ranging from 0.820 to 0.942. The validity and reliability of this scale were acceptable. This scale may be helpful to evaluate the usefulness of learning programs, i.e., the practice level of NSPDM.

Predictors of Decision Regret among Caregivers of Older Canadians Receiving Home Care: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey

Background. In Canada, caregivers of older adults receiving home care face difficult decisions that may lead to decision regret. We assessed difficult decisions and decision regret among caregivers of older adults receiving home care services and factors associated with decision regret. Methods. From March 13 to 30, 2020, at the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted an online survey with caregivers of older adults receiving home care in the 10 Canadian provinces. We distributed a self-administered questionnaire through Canada’s largest and most representative private online panel. We identified types of difficult health-related decisions faced in the past year and their frequency and evaluated decision regret using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), scored from 0 to 100. We performed descriptive statistics as well as bivariable and multivariable linear regression to identify factors predicting decision regret. Results. Among 932 participants, the mean age was 42.2 y (SD = 15.6 y), and 58.4% were male. The most frequently reported difficult decisions were regarding housing and safety (75.1%). The mean DRS score was 28.8/100 (SD = 8.6). Factors associated with less decision regret included higher caregiver age, involvement of other family members in the decision-making process, wanting to receive information about the options, and considering organizations interested in the decision topic and health care professionals as trustworthy sources of information (all P < 0.001). Factors associated with more decision regret included mismatch between the caregiver’s preferred option and the decision made, the involvement of spouses in the decision-making process, higher decisional conflict, and higher burden of care (all P < 0.001). Discussion. Decisions about housing and safety were the difficult decisions most frequently encountered by caregivers of older adults in this survey. Our results will inform future decision support interventions.