Reporting of consent rates in critical care studies: room for improvement

A randomised controlled trial of a nutrition and a decision support intervention to enable partnerships with families of critically ill patients

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of supporting family members to partner with health professionals on nutrition intakes and decision-making and to evaluate intervention and study feasibility.

BACKGROUND

Family partnerships can improve outcomes for critically ill patients and family members. Interventions that support families to engage with health professionals require evaluation.

DESIGN

A multi-centre, randomised, parallel group superiority Phase II randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

In nine intensive care units (ICUs) across three countries, critically ill patients ≥60 years, or those 55-59 years with advanced chronic diseases and expected ICU length of stay >72 h and their family member were enrolled between 9 May 2017 and 31 March 2020. Participants were randomised (1:1:1) to either a decision support or nutrition optimisation family-centred intervention, or usual care. Primary outcomes included protein and energy intake during ICU and hospital stay (nutrition intervention) and family satisfaction (decision support). Study feasibility was assessed as a composite of consent rate, intervention adherence, contamination and physician awareness of intervention assignment.

RESULTS

We randomised 135 patients/family members (consent rate 51.7%). The average rate of randomisation was 0.5 (0.13-1.53) per month. Unavailability (staff/family) was the major contributor to families not being approached for consent. Declined consent was attributed to families feeling overwhelmed (58/126, 46%). Pandemic visitor restrictions contributed to early study cessation. Intervention adherence for the decision support intervention was 76.9%-100.0% and for the nutrition intervention was 44.8%-100.0%. Nutritional adequacy, decisional conflict, satisfaction with decision-making and overall family satisfaction with ICU were similar for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Active partnerships between family members and health professionals are important but can be challenging to achieve in critical care contexts. We were unable to demonstrate the efficacy of either intervention. Feasibility outcomes suggest further refinement of interventions and study protocol may be warranted.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Interventions to promote family partnerships in critical illness are needed but require a greater understanding of the extent to which families want and are able to engage and the activities in which they have most impact.

REPORTING METHOD

This study has been reported following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) guidelines.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients and caregivers were engaged in and contributed to the development and subsequent iterations of the two family-centred interventions use in this study.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Trial registration.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, ID: NCT02920086. Registered on 30 September 2016. First patient enrolled on 9 May 2017 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT02920086&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=.

Trend in Clinical Trial Participation During COVID-19: A Secondary Analysis of the I-SPY COVID Clinical Trial

To analyze the temporal trend in enrollment rates in a COVID-19 platform trial during the first three waves of the pandemic in the United States.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of data from the I-SPY COVID randomized controlled trial (RCT).

SETTING

Thirty-one hospitals throughout the United States.

PATIENTS

Patients who were approached, either directly or via a legally authorized representative, for consent and enrollment into the I-SPY COVID RCT.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among 1,338 patients approached for the I-SPY COVID trial from July 30, 2020, to February 17, 2022, the number of patients who enrolled (n = 1,063) versus declined participation (n = 275) was used to calculate monthly enrollment rates. Overall, demographic and baseline clinical characteristics were similar between those who enrolled versus declined. Enrollment rates fluctuated over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, but there were no significant trends over time (Mann-Kendall test, p = 0.21). Enrollment rates were also comparable between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, age, sex, region of residence, COVID-19 severity of illness, and vaccination status were not significantly associated with the decision to decline consent.

CONCLUSIONS

In this secondary analysis of the I-SPY COVID clinical trial, there was no significant association between the enrollment rate and time period or vaccination status among all eligible patients approached for clinical trial participation. Additional studies are needed to better understand whether the COVID-19 pandemic has altered clinical trial participation and to develop strategies for encouraging participation in future COVID-19 and critical care clinical trials.

Co-designing and pilot testing an infographic to support patients/families through the REMAP-CAP consent process: a mixed-methods study protocol

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is critical to the ethical conduct of clinical research and requires understanding of a trial including its purpose, process, potential risks and benefits, and alternatives to participation. This can be challenging for complex trials, such as platform trials, and in high-stress environments, such as the intensive care unit (ICU). REMAP-CAP (randomized, embedded, multifactorial, adaptive platform trial for community-acquired pneumonia) is a platform trial which studies treatments for ICU patients with community-acquired pneumonia, including COVID-19. Patient/family partners (PFP) identified challenges during the REMAP-CAP consent process.

METHODS

This is a patient-centred co-design study to refine and test an infographic to supplement current REMAP-CAP consent documents. Infographic prototypes were developed by patients, substitute decision-makers (SDMs), and researchers with lived experience in the ICU or with ICU research. We will apply a two-phase exploratory sequential, mixed-methods research design. In phase 1, we will conduct focus groups with ICU patients, SDMs, and research coordinators (RCs). We will use inductive content analysis to inform infographic refinement, to be pilot tested in phase 2. Phase 2 is a prospective study within a trial (SWAT) at ≤ 5 REMAP-CAP sites. We will collect self-reported data from patients/SDMs and RCs. The primary outcome is feasibility (eligible consent encounters, receipt of infographic, consent to follow-up, completion of follow-up surveys). Data will be integrated to understand if/how quantitative results build upon the qualitatively informed infographic.

DISCUSSION

Phase 1 results will be used to co-design an infographic, directly informed by the perspectives of patients, SDMs, and RCs involved in ICU research consent discussions. Results from phase 2 will determine the feasibility of infographic implementation in REMAP-CAP consent encounters. These feasibility data will inform a larger SWAT to evaluate our consent infographic. If successful, use of a co-designed infographic to support REMAP-CAP consent documents may improve the experience of consent for patients, SDMs, and RCs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT Repository (SWAT no. 176).

Consent is a confounding factor in a prospective observational study of critically ill elderly patients

During analysis of a prospective multinational observation study of critically ill patients ≥80 years of age, the VIP2 study, we also studied the effects of differences in country consent for study inclusion. This is a post hoc analysis where the ICUs were analyzed according to requirement for study consent. Group A: ICUs in countries with no requirement for consent at admission but with deferred consent in survivors. Group B: ICUs where some form of active consent at admission was necessary either from the patient or surrogates. Patients’ characteristics, the severity of disease and outcome variables were compared. Totally 3098 patients were included from 21 countries. The median age was 84 years (IQR 81–87). England was not included because of changing criteria for consent during the study period. Group A (7 countries, 1200 patients), and group B (15 countries, 1898 patients) were comparable with age and gender distribution. Cognition was better preserved prior to admission in group B. Group A suffered from more organ dysfunction at admission compared to group B with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score median 8 and 6 respectively. ICU survival was lower in group A, 66.2% compared to 78.4% in group B (p<0.001). We hence found profound effects on outcomes according to differences in obtaining consent for this study. It seems that the most severely ill elderly patients were less often recruited to the study in group B. Hence the outcome measured as survival was higher in this group. We therefore conclude that consent likely is an important confounding factor for outcome evaluation in international studies focusing on old patients.

Including migrant oncology patients in research: A multisite pilot randomised controlled trial testing consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists

Background

Oncology patients who are migrants or refugees face worse outcomes due to language and communication barriers impacting care. Interventions such as consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists may prove beneficial in mediating communication challenges. However, designing robust research inclusive of patients who do not speak English is challenging. This study therefore aimed to: a) pilot test and assess the appropriateness of the proposed research design and methods for engaging migrant populations, and b) determine whether a multi-site RCT efficacy assessment of the communication intervention utilising these methods is feasible.

Methods

This study is a mixed-methods parallel-group, randomised controlled feasibility pilot trial. Feasibility outcomes comprised assessment of: i) screening and recruitment processes, ii) design and procedures, and iii) research time and costing. The communication intervention comprised audio-recordings of a key medical consultation with an interpreter, and question prompt lists and cancer information translated into Arabic, Greek, Traditional, and Simplified Chinese.

Results

Assessment of feasibility parameters revealed that despite barriers, methods utilised in this study supported the inclusion of migrant oncology patients in research. A future multi-site RCT efficacy assessment of the INFORM communication intervention using these methods is feasible if recommendations to strengthen screening and recruitment are adopted. Importantly, hiring of bilingual research assistants, and engagement with community and consumer advocates is essential. Early involvement of clinical and interpreting staff as key stakeholders is likewise recommended.

Conclusion

Results from this feasibility RCT help us better understand and overcome the challenges and misconceptions about including migrant patients in clinical research.

•

Migrant oncology patients face worse health outcomes due to language barriers.

•

Consultation recording and question prompt lists are effective communication interventions.

•

Designing robust research methods which overcome language barriers is important and achievable.

•

Engaging with community advocates and hiring of bilingual staff are research design strategies.

Cohort profile of Acutelines: a large data/biobank of acute and emergency medicine

PURPOSE

Research in acute care faces many challenges, including enrolment challenges, legal limitations in data sharing, limited funding and lack of singular ownership of the domain of acute care. To overcome these challenges, the Center of Acute Care of the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands, has established a de novo data, image and biobank named 'Acutelines'.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinical data, imaging data and biomaterials (ie, blood, urine, faeces, hair) are collected from patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a broad range of acute disease presentations. A deferred consent procedure (by proxy) is in place to allow collecting data and biomaterials prior to obtaining written consent. The digital infrastructure used ensures automated capturing of all bed-side monitoring data (ie, vital parameters, electrophysiological waveforms) and securely importing data from other sources, such as the electronic health records of the hospital, ambulance and general practitioner, municipal registration and pharmacy. Data are collected from all included participants during the first 72 hours of their hospitalisation, while follow-up data are collected at 3 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after their ED visit.

FINDINGS TO DATE

Enrolment of the first participant occurred on 1 September 2020. During the first month, 653 participants were screened for eligibility, of which 180 were approached as potential participants. In total, 151 (84%) provided consent for participation of which 89 participants fulfilled criteria for collection of biomaterials.

FUTURE PLANS

The main aim of Acutelines is to facilitate research in acute medicine by providing the framework for novel studies and issuing data, images and biomaterials for future research. The protocol will be extended by connecting with central registries to obtain long-term follow-up data, for which we already request permission from the participant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04615065.

Publication Trends of Pediatric and Adult Randomized Controlled Trials in General Medical Journals, 2005-2018: A Citation Analysis

Policy has been developed to promote the conduct of high-quality pediatric randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Whether these strategies have influenced publication trends in high-impact journals is unknown. We aim to evaluate characteristics, citation patterns, and publication trends of pediatric RCTs published in general medical journals (GMJs) compared with adult RCTs over a 13-year period. Studies were identified using Medline, and impact metrics were collected from Web of Science and Scopus. All RCTs published from 2005–2018 in 7 GMJs with the highest impact factors were identified for analysis. A random sample of matched pediatric and adult RCTs were assessed for publication characteristics, academic and non-academic citation. Citations were counted from publication until June 2019. Among 4146 RCTs, 2794 (67.3%) enrolled adults, 591 (14.2%) enrolled children, and 761 RCTs (18.3%) enrolled adult and pediatric patients. Adult RCTs published in GMJs grew by 5.1 publications per year (95% CI: 3.3–6.9), while the number of pediatric RCTs did not show significant change (−0.4 RCTs/year, 95% CI: −1.4–0.6). Adult RCTs were cited more than pediatric RCTs (median(IQR): 29.9 (68.5–462.8) citations/year vs. 13.2 (6.8–24.9) citations/year; p < 0.001); however, social media attention was similar (median(IQR) Altmetric Attention Score: 37 (13.75–133.8) vs. 26 (6.2–107.5); p = 0.25). Despite policies which may facilitate conduct of pediatric RCTs, the publishing gap in high-impact GMJs is widening.

Consent Rates Reported in Published Pediatric Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the average reported consent rate for published pediatric randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and whether this rate varies by trial characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN

A review of pediatric RCTs published in Medline in 2009, 2010, or 2015 was performed. Secondary analyses of prior trials, trials including adults, trials not requiring consent, or trials with missing or unclear consent data were excluded. Consent rate was defined as the number of patients enrolled divided by number of eligible patients where families were approached. Random effects meta-regression was conducted to determine the weighted average consent rate.

RESULTS

Of 2347 trials identified, 1651 were excluded. An additional 418 of 696 (60%) were excluded because the consent rate was missing or unclear. The average consent rate for 278 included RCTs was 82.6% (95% CI, 80.3%-84.8%) and was higher for vaccination compared with behavioral trials and for industry-funded compared with National Institutes of Health-funded or other government-funded trials. The average consent rate was <70% for 26% of included trials. Of these trials, US trials (28/77 [36.4%]) had a higher probability of a consent rate of <70% than non-US studies (35/64 [21.3%]) and multinational (9/37 [24.3%]) studies. There was slight variation by funding category.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the average consent rate for published trials was reasonably high, approximately one-quarter of trials had consent rates of <70%. Consent rates reporting has improved over time, but remains suboptimal. Our findings should assist with the planning of future pediatric RCTs, although consent data from unpublished trials are also needed.

Recruitment and adherence of randomized controlled trials for mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The recruitment and adherence status of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for population with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are little known. We aimed to explore the RCT recruitment and adherence status and factors associated with these among MCI patients.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PsycARTICLES from inception to 8th July 2019. Included studies were RCTs conducted among MCI patients with available data of invitation rate, eligibility rate, randomization rate, recruitment rate, adherence rate, satisfaction rate, or potential barrier for recruitment and compliance. Two authors screened the studies and extracted the data independently. We calculated pooled proportions of each rate and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Hundred and ten articles were judged to meet the study inclusion criteria from 10 387 articles. The invitation rates ranged from 9% to96% but were not pooled together due to high heterogeneity. The pooled overall eligibility, randomization, recruitment, intervention adherence, and follow-up adherence rates were 55% (95% CI: 48%-62%), 86% (95% CI: 81%-91%), 44% (95% CI: 37%-50%), 88% (95% CI: 86%-90%), and 85% (95% CI: 83%-87%), respectively. Non-MCI (47.5%), disease or medical problems (13.8%), and loss of interest (8.5%) were the most frequent reasons for screen failure. Refusal without reason (36.6%), adverse events (30.9%), and health issues (7.7%) were the most frequent reasons for drop-out.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided important information for future RCTs targeting at MCI patients. Strategies designed to improve participant recruitment and RCT adherence should be developed among this population.

Barriers and challenges in the process of including critically ill patients in clinical studies

Background

Clinical research in severely ill or injured patients is required to improve healthcare but may be challenging to perform in practice. The aim of this study was to analyse barriers and challenges in the process of including critically ill patients in clinical studies.

Methods

Data from critically ill patients considered for inclusion in an observational study of venous thromboembolism in Norway were analysed. This included quantitative and qualitative information from the screening log, consent forms and research notes.

Results

Among 279 eligible critically ill patients, 204 (73%) were omitted from the study due to challenges and barriers in the inclusion process. Reasons for omission were categorised as practical in 133 (65%), medical in 31 (15%), and legal or ethical in 40 (20%) of the patients. Among 70 included patients, 29 (41%) consents were from patients and 41 (59%) from their next of kin. Several challenges were described herein; these included whether patients were competent to give consent, and which next of kin that should represent the patient. Furthermore, some included patients were unable to recall what they have consented, and some appeared unable to separate research from treatment.

Conclusions

Barriers and challenges in the inclusion process led to the omission of near three out of four eligible patients. This analysis provided information about where the problem resides and may be solved. The majority of challenges among included patients were related to issues of autonomy and validity of consent.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03405766).

Comparison of randomized controlled trials discontinued or revised for poor recruitment and completed trials with the same research question: a matched qualitative study

Background

More than a quarter of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are prematurely discontinued, mostly due to poor recruitment of patients. In this study, we systematically compared RCTs discontinued or revised for poor recruitment and completed RCTs with the same underlying research question to better understand the causes of poor recruitment, particularly related to methodological aspects and context-specific study settings.

Methods

We compared RCTs that were discontinued or revised for poor recruitment to RCTs that were completed as planned, matching in terms of population and intervention. Based on an existing sample of RCTs discontinued or revised due to poor recruitment, we identified matching RCTs through a literature search for systematic reviews that cited the discontinued or revised RCT and matching completed RCTs without poor recruitment. Based on extracted data, we explored differences in the design, conduct, and study settings between RCTs with and without poor recruitment, separately for each research question using semi-structured discussions.

Results

We identified 15 separate research questions with a total of 29 RCTs discontinued or revised for poor recruitment and 48 RCTs completed as planned. Prominent research areas in the sample were cancer and acute care. The mean number of RCTs with poor recruitment per research question was 1.9 ranging from 1 to 4 suggesting clusters of research questions or settings prone to recruitment problems. The reporting quality of the recruitment process in RCT publications was generally low. We found that RCTs with poor recruitment often had narrower eligibility criteria, were investigator- rather than industry-sponsored, were associated with a higher burden for patients and recruiters, sometimes used outdated control interventions, and were often launched later in time than RCTs without poor recruitment compromising uncertainty about tested interventions through emerging evidence. Whether a multi- or single-center setting was advantageous for patient recruitment seemed to depend on the research context.

Conclusions

Our study confirmed previously identified causes for poor recruitment, i.e., narrow eligibility criteria, investigator sponsorship, and a reduced motivation of patients and recruiters. Newly identified aspects were that researchers need to be aware of all other RCTs on a research question so that compromising effects on the recruitment can be minimized and that a larger number of centers is not always advantageous.

[Reporting ethics board approval in German medical theses and journals]

Since 1975, the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association (WMA) has clearly required ethics committee approval for research into humans. Nevertheless, this Declaration is violated quite often. As many English-language publications have addressed the theme of ethics board approval in theses and other published works, it is now to be investigated in Germany for the first time.From 2013 to 2014, a total of 1,482 medical theses at four selected universities in addition to three German-language scientific journals were reviewed. In 543 theses, reference to ethics approval would have been required according to the criteria of the Declaration of Helsinki.However, ethics approval was stated in only 58.7% of cases, and even less frequently if the prevailing doctoral regulations or instructions did not refer to the necessity of obtaining ethics approval. Theses on pediatrics mentioned ethics approval most frequently (78.6%), whereas the proportion of surgical papers was the lowest (34.9%). Among the journals, Der Nervenarzt mentioned ethics approval most frequently (59.4%) and Der Chirurg least frequently (30%).Our results point to significant deficits in mentioning ethics approval in medical theses and publications. These deficits could easily be compensated for by a thorough approach of the referees of doctoral regulations and by journal reviewers and editors.

Success of University Student Volunteers in Obtaining Consent for Reviewing Private Health Information for Emergency Research

This study aimed to determine the success of university student volunteers in obtaining consent from parents to allow review of their child's personal health information (PHI) for emergency research screening. This study also aimed to examine the variables associated with successful consent. This was a prospective cross-sectional study conducted at a pediatric emergency department (ED). University students, who functioned as delegates of the health information custodian, approached parents for consent. Of 2,506 parents, 1,852 (73.9%) provided consent to allow review of their child's PHI for research screening. Variables associated with successful consent were high (≥12 months) versus low (<12 months) volunteer experience (OR = 2.0), research related (vs. unrelated) to the child's chief complaint (OR = 2.0), child treated regularly by specialists at the study institution (OR = 1.7), and ED presentation mid-week vs. weekend (OR = 1.7) and morning vs. evening presentation (OR = 1.4). When approached by a university student volunteer, about 25% of parents declined to have their child's PHI reviewed for research screening. This model of obtaining consent may put some emergency research at risk for selection bias. Variables that increase the odds of successful consent can be considered in program design to improve the effectiveness of this model.

A systematic review of discontinued trials suggested that most reasons for recruitment failure were preventable

OBJECTIVE

To collect and classify reported reasons for recruitment failure in discontinued randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to assess reporting quality.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (2010-2014) and a previous cohort of RCTs for published RCTs reporting trial discontinuation due to poor recruitment. Teams of two investigators selected eligible RCTs working independently and extracted information using standardized forms. We used an iterative approach to classify reasons for poor recruitment.

RESULTS

We included 172 RCTs discontinued due to poor recruitment (including 26 conference abstracts and 63 industry-funded RCTs). Of those, 131 (76%) reported one or more reasons for discontinuation due to poor recruitment. We identified 28 different reasons for recruitment failure; most frequently mentioned were overestimation of prevalence of eligible participants and prejudiced views of recruiters and participants on trial interventions. Few RCTs reported relevant details about the recruitment process such as how eligible participants were identified, the number of patients assessed for eligibility, and who actually recruited participants.

CONCLUSION

Our classification could serve as a checklist to assist investigators in the planning of RCTs. Most reasons for recruitment failure seem preventable with a pilot study that applies the planned informed consent procedure.