Who Enrolls in Observational End of Life Research? Report from the Cultural Variations in Approaches to End of Life Study

Primary and secondary data in emergency medicine health services research - a comparative analysis in a regional research network on multimorbid patients

BACKGROUND

This analysis addresses the characteristics of two emergency department (ED) patient populations defined by three model diseases (hip fractures, respiratory, and cardiac symptoms) making use of survey (primary) and routine (secondary) data from hospital information systems (HIS). Our aims were to identify potential systematic inconsistencies between both data samples and implications of their use for future ED-based health services research.

METHODS

The research network EMANET prospectively collected primary data (n=1442) from 2017-2019 and routine data from 2016 (n=9329) of eight EDs in a major German city. Patient populations were characterized using socio-structural (age, gender) and health- and care-related variables (triage, transport to ED, case and discharge type, multi-morbidity). Statistical comparisons between descriptive results of primary and secondary data samples for each variable were conducted using binomial test, chi-square goodness-of-fit test, or one-sample t-test according to scale level.

RESULTS

Differences in distributions of patient characteristics were found in nearly all variables in all three disease populations, especially with regard to transport to ED, discharge type and prevalence of multi-morbidity. Recruitment conditions (e.g., patient non-response), project-specific inclusion criteria (e.g., age and case type restrictions) as well as documentation routines and practices of data production (e.g., coding of diagnoses) affected the composition of primary patient samples. Time restrictions of recruitment procedures did not generate meaningful differences regarding the distribution of characteristics in primary and secondary data samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary and secondary data types maintain their advantages and shortcomings in the context of emergency medicine health services research. However, differences in the distribution of selected variables are rather small. The identification and classification of these effects for data interpretation as well as the establishment of monitoring systems in the data collection process are pivotal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00011930 (EMACROSS), DRKS00014273 (EMAAGE), NCT03188861 (EMASPOT).

Carer preferences of route of administration of transmucosal diamorphine and willingness to take part in a randomised controlled trial: an interview study (DIPPER)

Background

Children and young people are usually given liquid morphine by mouth for breakthrough pain, which can take thirty minutes to work. A faster-acting, quickly absorbed, needle-free pain medicine, that is easy to administer is needed such as transmucosal (sublingual, buccal, intranasal) diamorphine. Research evidence relating to the administration of medication for breakthrough pain in children and young people is limited. This study aims to describe the experiences and preferences of parents and/or children and young people regarding the route of administration of diamorphine, barriers and facilitators comparative to oral morphine, and participation in a randomised controlled trial.

Methods

In-depth, semi-structured interviews with parents and/or children and young people at home or hospital/hospice.

Results

Thirteen interviews with: nine mothers, one father, and three sets of parents jointly. No interviews took place with a child/young person. Most families had experience of the buccal route which was effective in ease of administration and time to control pain. The intranasal route was preferred by parents irrespective of experience. Parents’ willingness for their child to take part in a trial depended on the time commitment, their child’s pain trajectory and the stability of analgesic requirements.

Conclusion

A randomised controlled trial of oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine would need to consider trial logistics, especially time commitment. Parents felt that the trial should be introduced initially by the clinical team, with written information from the research team, and sufficient time to ask questions. Patients who had discontinued oral morphine because of side effects, or those with gastrointestinal failure, should be excluded. Maintaining stability in pain management was essential to families, so the timing of the trial is a potential issue.

Perceived Benefits and Burdens of Participation for Caregivers of Cancer Patients in Hospice Clinical Trials: A Pilot Study

CONTEXT

Hospice is a service for those with a life expectancy of six months or less. Family caregivers suffer from depression and anxiety as they care for their loved one until they die. Little is known about how research participants decide to consent to participate in clinical trials in the hospice setting.

OBJECTIVES

This pilot study sought to answer two research questions: 1) In what way do demographic characteristics, mental health, and perceived caregiving experience impact the decision by caregivers to participate in hospice clinical trials? 2) In what ways do the perceived physical, psychological, economic, familial, and social dimensions of caregivers' lives influence their decision to participate in hospice clinical trials?

METHODS

The characteristics and stated reasons for consent of hospice caregivers participating in a clinical trial were compared with individuals who refused clinical trial consent and only consented to this pilot study. Demographic, mental health, and perceptions of caregiving experience were measured as influencers to the consent decision. Recruitment calls were recorded and coded using framework analysis to identify perceived benefits and burdens impacting the decision to consent to the clinical trial.

RESULTS

Overall, trial participants were more often adult children to the patient (55% vs. 21%, P = 0.005), younger (56 vs. 63 years, P = 0.04), and employed (47% vs. 24%, P = 0.02) as compared with those who did not consent to participate in the trial. Reported levels of depression, anxiety, and quality of life were not significantly different between those who chose to participate in the clinical trial and those who participated only in this pilot study; however, caregiver burden was higher for those consenting to the clinical trial (4.05 vs. 7.16, P < 0.0001). Perceived benefits expressed by both groups were largely psychological as participants felt positive about contributing to science. Burdens expressed by both groups were predominately physical as they related to hesitation to participate in the intervention because of technology or the burdens of caregiving.

CONCLUSION

The benefits and burdens model for clinical trial participation is applicable to the caregiver experience in the hospice setting. Understanding the perceptions and dimensions of benefits and burdens to potential study participants is critical to not only the intervention design but also the tailoring of recruitment contacts and informed consent process.

An Analysis of Recruitment Efficiency for an End-of-Life Advance Care Planning Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND:

Optimizing recruitment efficiency is an important strategy to address the resource limitations that typically constrain clinical research. Surprisingly, little empiric data exist to guide research teams attempting to recruit a difficult population into similar studies. Our objective was to investigate factors associated with enrollment into an advance care planning interventional trial.

METHODS:

This study used secondary data of patients with advanced cancer receiving treatment at an academic medical center in central Pennsylvania who were referred to a randomized controlled trial of an advance care planning intervention. Enrolled participants were compared to nonparticipants with regard to age, gender, race, season of recruitment, elapsed time between recruitment stage, distance to study site, and number of recruitment calls.

RESULTS:

Of the 1988 patients referred, 200 participants were enrolled yielding a recruitment efficiency of 10%. Two-thirds of all enrolled participants were recruited with 1 or less phone calls, whereas only 5% were enrolled after 3 calls. There were no statistically significant differences in enrollment based on gender ( P = .88) or elapsed time between recruitment contacts ( P = .22). However, nonparticipants were slightly older ( P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS:

Our finding that individuals were more likely to enroll within the first 3 phone calls suggests that recruitment efforts should be focused on making initial contacts with potential participants, rather than continuing attempts to those who are unable to be contacted easily. Researchers could optimize their recruitment strategy by periodically performing similar analyses, comparing differences between participants and nonparticipants.

Family Caregiver Participation in Palliative Care Research: Challenging the Myth

CONTEXT

Despite international guidelines emphasizing consumer-directed care and autonomous decisions in research participation, there is a common myth that research can be an additional and unwanted burden on patients and their family members.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the experiences and impact of research involvement on family caregivers (FCs) of terminally ill people, focusing within home-based palliative care.

METHODS

Three hundred sixteen of 322 participants (98.1%), who completed an FC support intervention through a stepped-wedge cluster trial (Australia, 2012-2015), participated in a postintervention telephone interview on their study experiences, which included quantitative and qualitative questions.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven percent of both the control (n = 89) and intervention (n = 227) groups perceived positive aspects, whereas almost all did not report any negative aspects of being involved in this research; the majority rated their involvement as very/extremely beneficial (control 77%; intervention 83%). The qualitative analysis generated three major themes: "intrapersonal-inward directed"; "connection with others-outward directed"; and "interpersonal-participant-researcher relationship."

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided quantitative and qualitative evidence challenging the myth. In contrast to health professional concerns, FCs appreciated the opportunity to participate and benefited from their involvement in research. Research protocols need to be specifically tailored to the needs of family caregivers and include debriefing opportunities for all participants at the end of intervention studies, regardless of which group they have been assigned. Strategies that facilitate health professionals' understanding of the research and risk benefits may help reduce gatekeeping and improve the validity of research findings.

Patient, caregiver, health professional and researcher views and experiences of participating in research at the end of life: a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature

Background

The development of the evidence-base informing end of life (EoL) care is hampered by the assumption that patients at the EoL are too vulnerable to participate in research. This study aims to systematically and critically review the evidence regarding the experiences and views of patients, caregivers, professionals and researchers about participation in EoL care research, and to identify best practices in research participation.

Methods

We searched seven electronic databases, and hand searched three journals and the bibliographies of relevant papers. Inclusion criteria were original research papers on involvement in EoL care research or its impact on participants. Critical interpretive synthesis was used to integrate the whole body of empirical evidence on this topic and generate theoretical categories from the evidence.

Results

Of a total of 239 identified studies, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria, from: the US (11), the UK (6) and Australia (3). Most focused on patients with cancer (12) and were conducted in hospices (9) or hospitals (7). Studies enquired about issues related to: EoL care research in general (5), specific research methods (13), and trial research (2). The studies evaluating willingness to participate in EoL care research showed positive outcomes across the different parties involved in research. Factors influencing willingness were mainly physical and cognitive impairment. Participating in research was a positive experience for most patients and carers but a minority experienced distress. This was related to: characteristics of the participants; the type of research; or the way it was conducted. Participatory study designs were found particularly suitable for enabling the inclusion of a wide range of participants.

Conclusion

The evidence explored within this study demonstrates that the ethical concerns regarding patient participation in EoL care research are often unjustified. However, research studies in EoL care require careful design and execution that incorporates sensitivity to participants’ needs and concerns to enable their participation. An innovative conceptual model for research participation relevant for potentially vulnerable people was developed.

Designing Research With Hospice and Palliative Care Populations

Research in palliative care and hospice populations is important for improving quality of care, quality of life, and provider understanding of individuals at the end of life. However, this research involves many potential challenges. This review seeks to inform and assist researchers targeting to design studies targeting hospice and palliative care patients by presenting a thorough review of the published literature. This review covers English-language articles published from 1990 through 2009 listed in the PsycInfo, Medline, or CINAHL research databases under relevant keywords. Articles on pediatric hospice were not included. Issues discussed include study design, informed consent, and recruitment for participants. Synthesized recommendations for researchers in these populations are presented.

Cancer-related psychosocial research: what are the perspectives of cancer care centre users on participation?

PURPOSE

To explore the perspectives of cancer care centre users on participation in psychosocial research to inform research design and ethics.

METHODS

The study is based on a qualitative research design. Fourteen semistructured interviews were carried in people diagnosed with cancer and carers. The interview included four main questions about practical barriers to participation, types of research design, motivating factors and the conduct of research in a cancer care support setting. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Interviewees demonstrated a willingness to participate in psychosocial research within certain circumstances. There were no practical barriers identified, although they considered payment for research-related travel important. The most acceptable research design was the face-to-face interview and the least preferred was the randomised control trial. The factors that motivated participation were altruism, valuing research, and making a contribution to the centre. Interviewees supported the conduct of research in cancer care support centres conditional upon delaying recruitment during the initial months of users' visits and its need to be discreet to avoid deterring visitors from accessing the centre.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concludes that the personal interaction between participants and researchers is the most important feature of decision-making by patients/carers to join studies. Taking into account the perspectives of people affected by cancer during the early stages of research design may enhance recruitment and retention and can contribute to the development of research protocols and ethics.