Inclusion of Under-Represented Racial and Ethnic Groups in Cardiovascular Clinical Trials

Engaging patient and community stakeholders in the optimization of the Compassionate And Loving Mindset towards heart health risk (CALM Hearts) physical activity intervention: a description of initial work and protocol for future engagement activities

BACKGROUND

Participatory research approaches systematically integrate the perspectives of individuals, organizations, or communities that have a direct interest in a study's processes and outcomes (i.e., stakeholders) in research design and implementation. This supports interventions that are developed "by, not for" end-users, thereby increasing acceptability, uptake, and adherence. However, participatory approaches are relatively under-utilized in intervention development and behavioral change intervention research, in part, due to inadequate reporting of methodology. Therefore, to improve transparency in planning and reporting, we (a) describe how we engaged patients and community organizations (i.e., patient and community partners) in grant development for a self-compassion and physical activity behaviour change intervention for women with cardiovascular risk factors and (b) present a protocol for engaging patient and community partners in the optimization and implementation of the intervention moving forward.

METHODS

Our participatory research approach was guided by the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research patient engagement framework and our prior stakeholder engagement work. Four patients and three community partners were engaged at the level of Involve, meaning their perspectives informed directions, processes, and decisions at major project milestones. Specifically, patient and community partners engaged in three separate meetings during grant development wherein they: (a) established a Terms of Reference to guide engagement activities and expectations; (b) shaped the grant through guided conversations about research priorities, outcomes, and intervention delivery components that could be targeted for optimization and (c) co-developed a protocol that specifies how relationships will be initiated with future patient partners, proposes engagement activities across the research cycle, and includes plans for formal evaluation of engagement processes.

CONCLUSIONS

Participatory research approaches provide valuable insights into the development of behavioural interventions, especially when stakeholders can partner early and have a meaningful impact. By detailing our engagement activities to date, we hope to model an approach to engaging stakeholders in behavioral intervention development and demonstrate the impacts of doing so.

Strategies for improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in cardiovascular research: a primer

This paper aims to empower cardiovascular (CV) researchers by promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) principles throughout the research cycle. It defines DE&I and introduces practical strategies for implementation in recruitment, retention, and team dynamics within CV research. Evidence-based approaches supporting underrepresented populations' participation are outlined for each research phase. Emphasizing the significance of inclusive research environments, the paper offers guidance and resources. We invite CV researchers to actively embrace DE&I principles, enhancing research relevance and addressing longstanding CV health disparities.

Emphasizing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data Capture for Improved Cardiovascular Care of the LGBTQ+ Population

Importance

The rising self-identifying lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) population makes understanding the unique health care needs of sexual and gender minoritized patients an urgent one. The interaction between minority stress and cardiovascular disease has been well described among underrepresented minoritized populations. The underrepresentation of minoritized populations in clinical research is partly responsible for worse cardiovascular outcomes in these populations. The absence of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression (SOGIE) data makes it difficult to understand the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ+ adults, thereby widening health care disparities in this population. Advancing cardiovascular health equity for LGBTQ+ patients must begin with careful and accurate SOGIE data collection.

Observations

Current SOGIE data capture remains inadequate despite federal mandates. Challenges in data collection include political and regulatory discrimination, patient/practitioner hesitancy, lack of supportive guidance on SOGIE data collection, improper terminology, regulatory inertia, and inadequate and often incorrect integration of SOGIE data into electronic health records (EHRs). Additional challenges include grouping participants as "others" for statistical significance. The inclusion of SOGIE data has demonstrated an impact in other fields like cancer survivorship and surgery. The same needs to be done for cardiology.

Conclusions and Relevance

Potential solutions for improving much-needed SOGIE data collection include (1) implementing LGBTQ+ inclusive policies, (2) integrating SOGIE data into the EHR, (3) educating health care professionals on the relevance of SOGIE to patient-centered care, and (4) creating a diverse cardiovascular workforce. These steps can substantially enhance the ability to collect SOGIE data to address LGBTQ+ cardiovascular health care disparities.

Considerations for Gender-Affirming Hormonal and Surgical Care Among Transgender and Gender Diverse Adolescents and Adults With Congenital Heart Disease

BACKGROUND

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals and long-term survivors with adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) are both growing populations with specialized needs. No studies assess temporal trends or evaluate the care of TGD individuals with ACHD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Meetings between congenital cardiology and gender-affirming care specialists identified unique considerations in TGD individuals with ACHD. A retrospective chart review was then performed to describe patient factors and outpatient trends in those with an ACHD diagnosis undergoing gender-affirming hormonal or surgical care (GAHT/S) at 1 adult and 1 pediatric tertiary care center. Thirty-three TGD individuals with ACHD were identified, 21 with a history of GAHT/S. Fourteen (66%) had moderate or complex ACHD, 8 (38%) identified as transgender male, 9 (43%) transgender female, and 4 (19%) other gender identities. Three had undergone gender-affirming surgery. There were zero occurrences of the composite end point of unplanned hospitalization or thrombotic event over 71.1 person-years of gender-affirming care. Median age at first gender-affirming appointment was 16.8 years [interquartile range 14.8-21.5]. The most common treatment modification was changing estradiol administration from oral to transdermal to reduce thrombotic risk (n=3). An increasing trend was observed from zero TGD patients with ACHD attending a gender diversity appointment in 2012 to 14 patients in 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing population of TGD patients with ACHD and unique medical and psychosocial needs. Future studies must fully evaluate the reassuring safety profile observed in this small cohort. We share 10 actionable care considerations for providers with a goal of overseeing a safe and fulfilling gender transition across all TGD patients with ACHD.

The Inclusion of Underrepresented Populations in Cardiovascular Genetics and Epidemiology

Novel genetic risk markers have helped us to advance the field of cardiovascular epidemiology and refine our current understanding and risk stratification paradigms. The discovery and analysis of variants can help us to tailor prognostication and management. However, populations underrepresented in cardiovascular epidemiology and cardiogenetics research may experience inequities in care if prediction tools are not applicable to them clinically. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to outline the barriers that underrepresented populations can face in participating in genetics research, to describe the current efforts to diversify cardiogenetics research, and to outline strategies that researchers in cardiovascular epidemiology can implement to include underrepresented populations. Mistrust, a lack of diverse research teams, the improper use of sensitive biodata, and the constraints of genetic analyses are all barriers for including diverse populations in genetics studies. The current work is beginning to address the paucity of ethnically diverse genetics research and has already begun to shed light on the potential benefits of including underrepresented and diverse populations. Reducing barriers for individuals, utilizing community-driven research processes, adopting novel recruitment strategies, and pushing for organizational support for diverse genetics research are key steps that clinicians and researchers can take to develop equitable risk stratification tools and improve patient care.

The Canadian Women's Heart Health Alliance ATLAS on the Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in Women - Chapter 9: Summary of Current Status, Challenges, Opportunities, and Recommendations

This final chapter of the Canadian Women's Heart Health Alliance "ATLAS on the Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in Women" presents ATLAS highlights from the perspective of current status, challenges, and opportunities in cardiovascular care for women. We conclude with 12 specific recommendations for actionable next steps to further the existing progress that has been made in addressing these knowledge gaps by tackling the remaining outstanding disparities in women's cardiovascular care, with the goal to improve outcomes for women in Canada.

Process Evaluation of a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of a Quadruple Ultra-Low-Dose Treatment for Hypertension Within a Federally Qualified Health Center Network (QUARTET USA)

BACKGROUND

This convergent parallel-design mixed-methods process evaluation of the QUARTET USA (Quadruple Ultra-Low-Dose Treatment for Hypertension USA) clinical trial (NCT03640312) explores patient and health care professional perceptions about the use of low-dose quadruple therapy (LDQT) as a novel strategy for hypertension management.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A survey of all 62 patients enrolled in the QUARTET USA trial was conducted. A subsample of 13 patients and 11 health care professionals, recruited via purposive sampling, took part in semistructured interviews. At enrollment, 68% of participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [11.5] years; 56% self-identified as Hispanic: Mexican ethnicity, 16% as Hispanic: other ethnicity, 16% as Black race, 8% as White race, and 1.6% as South Asian race) reported that their current health depended on blood pressure medications, and 48% were concerned about blood pressure medications. At trial completion, 80% were satisfied with LDQT, 96% were certain the benefits of taking LDQT outweighed the disadvantages, and 96% reported that LDQT was convenient to take. Both patients and health care professionals found LDQT acceptable because it reduced patients' perceived pill burden and facilitated medication adherence. Health care professionals stated that a perceived limitation of LDQT was the inability to titrate doses. Steps to facilitate LDQT implementation include introducing stepped-care combinations and treatment protocols, inclusion in clinical practice guidelines, and eliminating patient cost barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

LDQT was an acceptable strategy for hypertension treatment among patients and health care professionals involved in the QUARTET USA clinical trial. Although LDQT was generally perceived as beneficial for maintaining patients' blood pressure control and facilitating adherence, some clinicians perceived limitations in titration inflexibility, adverse effects, and costs.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03640312.

Health Disparities, Clinical Trials, and the Digital Divide

In the past few years, there have been rapid advances in technology and the use of digital tools in health care and clinical research. Although these innovations have immense potential to improve health care delivery and outcomes, there are genuine concerns related to inadvertent widening of the digital gap consequentially exacerbating health disparities. As such, it is important that we critically evaluate the impact of expansive digital transformation in medicine and clinical research on health equity. For digital solutions to truly improve the landscape of health care and clinical trial participation for all persons in an equitable way, targeted interventions to address historic injustices, structural racism, and social and digital determinants of health are essential. The urgent need to focus on interventions to promote health equity was made abundantly clear with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which magnified long-standing social and racial health disparities. Novel digital technologies present a unique opportunity to embed equity ideals into the ecosystem of health care and clinical research. In this review, we examine racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials, historic instances of unethical research practices in biomedical research and its impact on clinical trial participation, and the digital divide in health care and clinical research, and we propose suggestions to achieve digital health equity in clinical trials. We also highlight key digital health opportunities in cardiovascular medicine and dermatology as exemplars, and we offer future directions for development and adoption of patient-centric interventions aimed at narrowing the digital divide and mitigating health inequities.

Are we enrolling the right patients? A scoping review of external validity and generalizability of clinical trials in bloodstream infections

BACKGROUND

Having a representative population in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) improves external validity and generalizability of trial results. There are limited data examining differences between RCT-enrolled and real-world populations in bloodstream infections (BSI).

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a scoping review aiming to review studies assessing generalizability of BSI RCT populations, to identify sub-groups that have been systematically under-represented and to explore approaches to improve external validity of future RCTs.

SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for terms related to external validity or generalizability, BSI, and clinical trials in papers published up to 1 August 2023. Studies comparing enrolled versus nonenrolled patients, or papers discussing external validity or generalizability in the context of BSI RCTs were included.

CONTENT

Sixteen papers were included in the final review. Five compared RCT-enrolled and nonenrolled participants from the same source population. There were significant differences between the two groups in all studies, with nonenrolled patients having a greater comorbidity burden and consistently worse outcomes including mortality. We identified several barriers to improving generalizability of RCT populations and outlined potential approaches to reduce these barriers, such as alternative/simplified consent processes, streamlining eligibility criteria and follow-up procedures, quota-based sampling techniques, and ensuring diversity in site and study team selection.

IMPLICATIONS

Study cohorts in BSI RCTs are not representative of the general BSI patient population. As we increasingly adopt large pragmatic trials in infectious diseases, it is important to recognize the importance of maximizing generalizability to ensure that our research findings are of direct relevance to our patients.

Recruiting adults of ethnic minorities into clinical trials: a synthesis of strategies

There is a long history of BAME under-representation in medical research. Underrepresentation of minority ethnic groups have been assessed by several studies, showing that black and minority ethnic groups were less likely to participate and engage in medical research when compared to white British groups (in relation to education, occupation, health, belief, and attitudes to medical research).There may be several strategies that improve inclusivity, including translation of participant information, culturally specific recruitment, and adaptations to the invitation process. However, with a dearth of literature in the area, there is now a need to contextualise these strategies in relation to renal research.

Managing patients with sex-, race-, or ethnicity-based cardiovascular health inequities

ABSTRACT

Cardiovascular health inequities are experienced among cisgender women, gender minorities, Black and Indigenous people, and people with lower socioeconomic status. Early identification and treatment of patients at risk for disparate and adverse cardiac health outcomes are essential.

Health Techequity: Opportunities for Digital Health Innovations to Improve Equity and Diversity in Cardiovascular Care

Purpose of Review

In this review, we define health equity, disparities, and social determinants of health; the different components of digital health; the barriers to digital health equity; and cardiovascular digital health trials and possible solutions to improve health equity through digital health.

Recent Findings

Digital health interventions show incredible potential to improve cardiovascular diseases by obtaining longitudinal, continuous, and actionable patient data; increasing access to care; and by decreasing delivery barriers and cost. However, certain populations have experienced decreased access to digital health innovations and decreased representation in cardiovascular digital health trials.

Summary

Special efforts will need to be made to expand access to the different elements of digital health, ensuring that the digital divide does not exacerbate health disparities. As the expansion of digital health technologies continues, it is vital to increase representation of minoritized groups in all stages of the process: product development (needs findings and screening, concept generation, product creation, and testing), clinical research (pilot studies, feasibility studies, and randomized control trials), and finally health services deployment.