1
|
Anastasi JK, Capili B, Norton M, McMahon DJ, Marder K. Recruitment and retention of clinical trial participants: understanding motivations of patients with chronic pain and other populations. FRONTIERS IN PAIN RESEARCH 2024; 4:1330937. [PMID: 38606348 PMCID: PMC11006977 DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2023.1330937] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 04/13/2024] Open
Abstract
This paper aims to present and discuss the issues, challenges, and strategies related to recruitment and retention in clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain. The randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) is widely regarded as the gold standard for evaluating clinical interventions. However, it is crucial to acknowledge and address the challenges associated with recruiting and retaining participants. To prioritize the experience of the study population, targeted outreach strategies and a patient-centric approach are necessary. Researchers should consider incorporating recruitment and retention strategies during the study design phase. Implementing multi-pronged recruitment methods, leveraging relationships with community providers, and involving representatives of the patient population are helpful approaches. Effective communication and maintaining a professional environment are vital for optimizing engagement and supporting the successful execution of clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joyce K. Anastasi
- Division of Special Studies in Symptom Management, New York University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Bernadette Capili
- Heilbrunn Family Center for Research Nursing, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Margaret Norton
- Division of Special Studies in Symptom Management, New York University, New York, NY, United States
- Department of Nursing, St. Joseph's University, Brooklyn, NY, United States
| | - Donald J. McMahon
- Division of Special Studies in Symptom Management, New York University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Karen Marder
- Irving Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dobra R, Davies J, Elborn S, Kee F, Madge S, Boeri M. A discrete choice experiment to quantify the influence of trial features on the decision to participate in cystic fibrosis trials. J Cyst Fibros 2024; 23:73-79. [PMID: 38042750 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2023.04.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2022] [Revised: 03/20/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient-centred trial design optimises recruitment and retention, reduces trial failure rates and increases the diversity of trial cohorts. This allows safe and effective treatments to reach clinic more quickly. To achieve this, patients' views must be incorporated into trial design. METHODS A discrete choice experiment was used to quantify preferences of pwCF for trials features; medicine type, trial location, stipend, washout, drug access on trial completion and trial design. Respondents were presented pairs of hypothetical trial scenarios with different level combinations assigned through experimental design. Respondents were asked to pick their preferred option or decline both. The cross-sectional data were explored using a Random Parameters Logit model. RESULTS We received 207 eligible responses between Oct2020-Jan2021. The strongest influence on the decision to participate was trial location; pwCF favour participation at their usual clinical centre. Greater travel distances made respondents less willing to participate. Post-trial drug access ranked second. pwCF would rather participate in modulator trials than trials of other drugs. In general, pwCF did not favour a washout period, but were more prepared to washout non-modulators than modulators. Stipend provision was not ranked highly, but higher stipends increased intention to participate. Trial design (placebo vs open-label) had minimal influence on the decision to participate. There are complex interactions between placebos and washouts. CONCLUSIONS We used quantitative methods to systematically elicit preferences of pwCF for clinical trials' features. We explore the relevance of our findings to trial design and delivery in the current CF trials landscape.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Dobra
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, UK; Department of Paediatrics, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
| | - Jane Davies
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, UK; Department of Paediatrics, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
| | - Stuart Elborn
- School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK
| | - Frank Kee
- Centre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, UK
| | - Susan Madge
- Department of Adult Cystic Fibrosis, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pratscher SD, Sibille KT, Fillingim RB. Conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention in adults with chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomized controlled pilot study. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2023; 9:15. [PMID: 36694217 PMCID: PMC9872326 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-023-01247-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/16/2023] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain is a major source of human suffering, and chronic low back pain (cLBP) is among the most prevalent, costly, and disabling of pain conditions. Due to the significant personal and societal burden and the complex and recurring nature of cLBP, self-management approaches that can be practiced at home are highly relevant to develop and test. The respiratory system is one of the most integrated systems of the body, and breathing is bidirectionally related with stress, emotion, and pain. Thus, the widespread physiological and psychological impact of breathing practices and breathwork interventions hold substantial promise as possible self-management strategies for chronic pain. The primary aim of the current randomized pilot study is to test the feasibility and acceptability of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention compared to a sham control condition. METHODS The rationale and procedures for testing a 5-day conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention, compared to a deep breathing sham control intervention, in 24 adults (18-65 years) with cLBP is described. Both interventions will be delivered using standardized audio recordings and practiced over 5 days (two times in-person and three times at-home), and both are described as Breathing and Attention Training to reduce possible expectancy and placebo effects common in pain research. The primary outcomes for this study are feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility will be evaluated by determining rates of participant recruitment, adherence, retention, and study assessment completion, and acceptability will be evaluated by assessing participants' satisfaction and helpfulness of the intervention. We will also measure other clinical pain, psychological, behavioral, and physiological variables that are planned to be included in a follow-up randomized controlled trial. DISCUSSION This will be the first study to examine the effects of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention for individuals with chronic pain. The successful completion of this smaller-scale pilot study will provide data regarding the feasibility and acceptability to conduct a subsequent trial testing the efficacy of this breathing self-management practice for adults with cLBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT04740710 . Registered on 5 February 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven D Pratscher
- Department of Community Dentistry and Behavioral Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
- Pain Research and Intervention Center of Excellence, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
| | - Kimberly T Sibille
- Pain Research and Intervention Center of Excellence, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
- Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Roger B Fillingim
- Department of Community Dentistry and Behavioral Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
- Pain Research and Intervention Center of Excellence, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ferguson MC, McNicol E, Kleykamp BA, Sandoval K, Haroutounian S, Holzer KJ, Kerns RD, Veasley C, Turk DC, Dworkin RH. Perspectives on Participation in Clinical Trials Among Individuals With Pain, Depression, and/or Anxiety: An ACTTION Scoping Review. THE JOURNAL OF PAIN 2023; 24:24-37. [PMID: 36152760 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2022.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/04/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
For individuals experiencing pain, the decision to engage in clinical trials may be influenced by a number of factors including current and past care, illness severity, physical functioning, financial stress, and caregiver support. Co-occurring depression and anxiety may add to these challenges. The aim of this scoping review was to describe perspectives about clinical trial participation, including recruitment and retention among individuals with pain and pain comorbidities, including depression and/or anxiety. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Study features, sample demographics, perspectives, barriers and/or motivations were collected and described. A total of 35 assessments were included in this scoping review with 24 focused on individuals with pain (24/35, 68.6%), 9 on individuals with depression and/or anxiety (9/35, 25.7%), and 2 on individuals with pain and co-occurring depression/anxiety (2/35, 5.7%). Barriers among participants with pain and those with depression included: research team's communication of information, fear of interventional risks, distrust (only among respondents with pain), too many procedures, fear of inadequate treatment, disease-life stressors, and embarrassment with study procedures (more commonly reported in participants with depression). Facilitators in both groups included: altruism and supportive staff, better access to care, and the ability to have outcome feedback (more commonly among individuals with depression). Individuals with pain and depression experience challenges that affect trial recruitment and retention. Engaging individuals with pain within research planning may assist in addressing these barriers and the needs of individuals affected by pain and/or depression. PERSPECTIVE: This review highlights the need to address barriers and facilitators to participation in clinical trials, including the need for an assessment of perspectives from underserved or marginalized populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- McKenzie C Ferguson
- School of Pharmacy, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, Illinois.
| | - Ewan McNicol
- School of Pharmacy, MCPHS University, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Bethea A Kleykamp
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - Karin Sandoval
- School of Pharmacy, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, Illinois
| | - Simon Haroutounian
- Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Katherine J Holzer
- Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Robert D Kerns
- Departments of Psychiatry, Neurology and Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Christin Veasley
- Co-founder and Director, Chronic Pain Research Alliance, North Kingstown, Rhode Island
| | - Dennis C Turk
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Robert H Dworkin
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Knoerl R, Berry D, Meyerhardt JA, Reyes K, Salehi E, Thornton K, Gewandter JS. Identifying participants' preferences for modifiable chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy prevention clinical trial factors: an adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis. Support Care Cancer 2022; 30:9963-9973. [PMID: 36355216 PMCID: PMC9648439 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07447-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE There are no recommended treatments for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) prevention. Recruitment to CIPN prevention clinical trials is challenging because it is difficult to enroll patients between the time of cancer diagnosis and the initiation of neurotoxic chemotherapy. The purpose of this exploratory-sequential mixed-methods study was to determine patients' preferences that could affect the choice to participate in CIPN prevention clinical trials. METHODS First, twenty cognitive interviews were conducted with adults who completed less than three neurotoxic chemotherapy infusions to clarify clinical trial attributes and levels thought to be important to patients when deciding whether to enroll in CIPN prevention trials (i.e., type of treatment, clinical tests, reimbursement, survey delivery; length of visits, timing of follow-up, when to begin treatment). Second, another eighty-eight patients completed an adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis survey that incorporated the finalized attributes and levels. Each level was assigned a part-worth utility score using Hierarchical Bayes Estimation. The relative importance of each attribute was calculated. RESULTS The attributes with the highest relative importance values were type of treatment (27.1%) and length of study visits (20.2%). The preferred levels included non-medicine treatment (53.49%), beginning treatment after experiencing CIPN (60.47%), email surveys (63.95%), assessments that include surveys and clinical exams (39.53%), under 30-min visits (44.19%), $50/week reimbursement (39.53%), and 1-month post-chemotherapy follow-up visits (32.56%). CONCLUSIONS Patients' preferences for participation may be included in the design of future CIPN prevention clinical trials to potentially bolster study enrollment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert Knoerl
- Phyllis F. Cantor Center for Research in Nursing and Patient Care Services, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave LW518, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
- Present Address: University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls St, Office 2350;, MI, 48109, Ann Arbor, USA.
| | - Donna Berry
- Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | | | - Kaitlen Reyes
- Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
| | - Elahe Salehi
- Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
| | - Katherine Thornton
- Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer S Gewandter
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Thomas M, Marshall DA, Choudhary D, Bartlett SJ, Sanchez AL, Hazlewood GS. The Application of Preference Elicitation Methods in Clinical Trial Design to Quantify Trade-Offs: A Scoping Review. THE PATIENT 2022; 15:423-434. [PMID: 34927216 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00560-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/10/2021] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Patients can express preferences for different treatment options in a healthcare context, and these can be measured with quantitative preference elicitation methods. OBJECTIVE Our objective was to conduct a scoping review to determine how preference elicitation methods have been used in the design of clinical trials. METHODS We conducted a scoping review to identify primary research studies, involving any health condition, that used quantitative preference elicitation methods, including direct utility-based approaches, and stated preference studies, to value health trade-offs in the context of clinical trial design. Studies were identified by screening existing systematic and scoping reviews and with a primary literature search in MEDLINE from 2010 to the present. We extracted study characteristics and the application of preference elicitation methods to clinical trial design according to the SPIRIT checklist from primary studies and summarized the findings descriptively. RESULTS We identified 18 eligible studies. The included studies applied patient preferences to five areas of clinical trial design: intervention selection (n = 1), designing N-of-1 trials (n = 1), outcome selection and weighting composite and ordinal outcomes (n = 12), sample size calculations (n = 2), and recruitment (n = 2). Using preference elicitation methods led to different decisions being made, such as using preference-weighted composite outcomes instead of equally weighted composite outcomes. CONCLUSION Preference elicitation methods are infrequently used to design clinical trials but may lead to changes throughout the trial that could affect the evidence generated. Future work should consider measurement challenges and explore stakeholder perceptions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Thomas
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada
| | - Deborah A Marshall
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Daksh Choudhary
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Susan J Bartlett
- Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
- Centre for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Research Institute McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Adalberto Loyola Sanchez
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Glen S Hazlewood
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada.
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Belitskaya-Levy I, Clark JD, Shih MC, Bair MJ. Treatment Preferences for Chronic Low Back Pain: Views of Veterans and Their Providers. J Pain Res 2021; 14:161-171. [PMID: 33536780 PMCID: PMC7850463 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s290400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2020] [Accepted: 12/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose This study was conducted to characterize chronic low back pain (cLBP) and to identify treatment histories and preferences for cLBP management among Veterans and primary care providers within the Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. Participants and Methods Veterans with cLBP from five geographically diverse VA medical centers were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 and 10 codes from VA administrative data as were primary care providers at these same sites. From these data, Veterans (200/per site) and providers (160/per site) were selected and mailed surveys. Open-ended interview data were collected from a subset of Veterans and providers. Results In total, 235 Veterans and 67 providers returned completed surveys. More than 80% of the Veteran respondents had daily back pain for more than 1 year. Most Veterans had tried several treatments for their pain with medications and physical therapy being the most commonly used. Veterans and providers had similar attitudes towards many cLBP treatments with the exception of psychological therapies that were more favored by providers. Open-ended interview data showed that Veterans and providers emphasized the need for multi-component approaches to treatment. Conclusion Among Veterans, cLBP is typically of sustained duration, is relatively severe, and also interferes significantly with normal functioning. Veterans are experienced with respect to treatments and had similar attitudes towards many cLBP treatments as their providers, especially tailored approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilana Belitskaya-Levy
- VA Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center - Mountain View Division, Palo Alto Healthcare System, Mountain View, CA, USA
| | - J David Clark
- Anesthesiology Service, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA.,Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Mei-Chiung Shih
- VA Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center - Mountain View Division, Palo Alto Healthcare System, Mountain View, CA, USA
| | - Matthew J Bair
- VA HSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication, Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA.,Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.,Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dworkin RH, Kerns RD, McDermott MP, Turk DC, Veasley C. The ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments, part II: mitigating bias, maximizing value. Pain Rep 2021; 6:e886. [PMID: 33521484 PMCID: PMC7838005 DOI: 10.1097/pr9.0000000000000886] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2020] [Accepted: 11/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Summaries of the articles included in part II of the ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments are followed by brief overviews of methodologic considerations involving precision pain medicine, pragmatic clinical trials, real world evidence, and patient engagement in clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert H. Dworkin
- Departments of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Neurology, and Psychiatry, Center for Health + Technology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA
| | - Robert D. Kerns
- Departments of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Michael P. McDermott
- Departments of Biostatistics and Computational Biology and Neurology, Center for Health + Technology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA
| | - Dennis C. Turk
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Design and conduct of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials. Pain Rep 2020; 6:e845. [PMID: 33511323 PMCID: PMC7837951 DOI: 10.1097/pr9.0000000000000854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2020] [Revised: 08/07/2020] [Accepted: 08/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide readers with a basis for understanding the emerging science of clinical trials and to provide a set of practical, evidence-based suggestions for designing and executing confirmatory clinical trials in a manner that minimizes measurement error. The most important step in creating a mindset of quality clinical research is to abandon the antiquated concept that clinical trials are a method for capturing data from clinical practice and shifting to a concept of the clinical trial as a measurement system, consisting of an interconnected set of processes, each of which must be in calibration for the trial to generate an accurate and reliable estimate of the efficacy (and safety) of a given treatment. The status quo of inaccurate, unreliable, and protracted clinical trials is unacceptable and unsustainable. This article gathers aspects of study design and conduct under a single broad umbrella of techniques available to improve the accuracy and reliability of confirmatory clinical trials across traditional domain boundaries.
Collapse
|