Adding quality to quantity in randomized controlled trials of addiction prevention and treatment: a new framework to facilitate the integration of qualitative research

Family member's experiences with and evaluation of an ICU Liaison Nurse Service: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Family members of critically ill patients often experience anxiety when their relatives are transferred from ICU to another level of care. ICU liaison nurse (ICULN) visits have been associated with improved support for patients, their families and nursing staff but has not been extensively studied in the non-English speaking setting. Yet, cross-country variations such as how hospital care is delivered and by who means that innovations such as the ICULN may not be able to be simply transferred to other contexts and may not have similar outcomes.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate family member's experiences with and evaluation of ICULN support service in one Swedish ICU.

STUDY DESIGN

A qualitative evaluation study was undertaken, recruiting family members of former ICU patients. Audio-taped in-depth interviews were conducted. Data were analysed by content analysis.

FINDINGS

Fifteen family members were interviewed. Two categories: Minds the gap between intensive care and the next care level and providing stability in an uncertain situation were identified. The ICULN supported the family members both directly, when the ICULNs listened to their questions and met their needs, and indirectly, when the ICULNs took responsibility for the patients and their physical and psychological conditions and wellbeing.

CONCLUSION

Families valued and were satisfied with the ICULN service but also gave suggestions to improve the service in this particular hospital context.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The study showed that an ICULN support service met several needs of family members and therefore was a beneficial way to support patients and family members in the transition from the ICU to the ward.

Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people's interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

Introduction

Mixed methods research intervention studies integrate quantitative evaluation approaches, such as randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, with qualitative research to evaluate the effectiveness, efficacy, or other results of an intervention or program. These types of studies, which have attracted growing attention in recent years, enhance the scope and rigor of the evaluation. While various frameworks that summarize the justifications for carrying out these types of studies and provide implementation guidance have been published in the last few years in the health sciences, we do not know whether such frameworks have been properly implemented in the social and educational sciences. This review examined the methodological features and reporting practices of mixed methods intervention studies aimed at increasing young people's interest in STEM.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out in APA PsycNET, ERIC, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science, and a hand search in 20 journals. We included peer-reviewed English-language articles that reported intervention studies with a quantitative component measuring outcomes specific to increasing secondary school students' interest in STEM fields, a qualitative component conducted before, during, or after the quantitative component, and evidence of integration of both components. Qualitative content analysis and ideal-type analysis were used to synthesize the findings.

Results

We found 34 studies; the majority published in the last ten years. Several patterns of mixed methods application were described in these studies, illustrating the unique insights that can be gained by employing this methodology. The reporting quality of the included studies was generally adequate, especially regarding the justification for using a mixed methods intervention design and the integration of the quantitative and qualitative components. Nonetheless, a few reporting issues were observed, such as a lack of detail in the presentation of the mixed methods design, an inadequate description of the qualitative sampling and analysis techniques, and the absence of joint displays for representing integration.

Discussion

Authors must pay attention to these issues to ensure that the insights obtained by the use of mixed methods research are effectively communicated.

What works? Lessons from a pretrial qualitative study to inform a multi-component intervention for refugees and asylum seekers: Learning Through Play and EMDR Group Traumatic Episode Protocol

Almost half of the trials failed to recruit their targeted sample size of which 89% could be preventable. Successful implementation of mental health trials in a context of forcibly displaced individuals can be even more challenging. Mental health difficulties have the potential to impact parenting skills, which are linked to poor development in children, while parenting interventions can improve parents' mental health and parenting behaviors. However, the evidence on parenting interventions for refugees is limited. A parenting intervention, Learning Through Play Plus Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Group Treatment Protocol, has been designed to address parental mental health. This pretrial qualitative study, conducted with refugees, asylum seekers and professionals, aimed to explore their perceptions of the intervention and to identify barriers and recommendations for better engagement, recruitment, and delivery. Three themes were generated from thematic analysis: the content of the intervention, suggestions for improvement and implementation, and understanding the role of the facilitator. These themes provided insights into the issues that might predict the barriers for delivery of the intervention and offered several changes, including destigmatization strategies to improve engagement.

How to embed qualitative research in trials: insights from the feasibility study of the SAFER trial programme

Qualitative research can enhance the design, conduct and interpretation of trials. Despite this, few trials incorporate qualitative methods, and those that do may not realise their full potential. In this commentary, we highlight how qualitative research can contribute to the design, conduct and day-to-day running of a trial, outlining the working arrangements and relationships that facilitate these contributions. In doing so, we draw on (i) existing frameworks on the role of qualitative research alongside trials and (ii) our experience of integrated qualitative research conducted as part of the feasibility study of the SAFER trial (Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke), a cluster randomised controlled trial of screening people aged 70 and above for atrial fibrillation in primary care in England. The activities and presence of the qualitative team contributed to important changes in the design, conduct and day-to-day running of the SAFER feasibility study, and the subsequent main trial, informing diverse decisions concerning trial documentation, trial delivery, timing and content of measures and the information given to participating patients and practices. These included asking practices to give screening results to all participants and not just to 'screen positive' participants, and greater recognition of the contribution of practice reception staff to trial delivery. These changes were facilitated by a 'one research team' approach that underpinned all formal and informal working processes from the outset and maximised the value of both qualitative and trial coordination expertise. The challenging problems facing health services require a combination of research methods and data types. Our experience and the literature show that the benefits of embedding qualitative research in trials are more likely to be realised if attention is given to both structural factors and relationships from the outset. These include sustained and sufficient funding for qualitative research, embedding qualitative research fully within the trial programme, providing shared infrastructure and resources and committing to relationships based on mutual recognition of and respect for the value of different methods and perspectives. We outline key learning for the planning of future trials.Trial registration: Screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG to reduce stroke ISRCTN16939438 (feasibility study); Screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG to reduce stroke - a randomised controlled trial ISRCTN72104369 .

Expert stakeholder perspectives on the acceptability of treatment-as-prevention in prison: a qualitative substudy of the 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' project (SToP-C)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Mathematical modelling has demonstrated the theoretical feasibility of HCV treatment-as-prevention strategies in custodial settings, yet limited empirical data exists. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' study is the world's first trial of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment-as-prevention in prison. This study aimed to analyse how expert stakeholders involved in the Australian HCV response assessed the acceptability of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison using interview data from the SToP-C qualitative substudy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative analysis using semi-structured interviews in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Nineteen key HCV experts.

MEASUREMENTS

Drawing upon Sekhon's theoretical framework of acceptability, data were organized thematically under four component constructs of acceptability: affective attitude; ethicality; opportunity costs; and perceived effectiveness.

FINDINGS

Most differences in participant assessments of acceptability were a matter of relative emphasis and prioritization rather than absolute polarity. Nonetheless, a small minority of participants was overtly critical of the approach. Arguing against the focus on treatment, they instead advocated for prevention-as-prevention, including the improvement and expansion of existing harm reduction measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative analysis of expert stakeholder assessments of the acceptability of hepatitis C virus treatment-as-prevention in Australian prisons found no opposition to the universal rollout of direct-acting anti-virals, but most voiced concern regarding the lack of effective primary prevention in Australian prisons.

'This could be my last chance': Therapeutic optimism in a randomised controlled trial for substance use disorders

In randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 'therapeutic optimism' describes a participant's belief they will benefit from the study treatment, despite the express goal of RCTs to test unknown aspects of interventions. Harbouring such expectations may interfere with RCT participation experiences, particularly among marginalised populations, such as people with substance use disorders (PSUD) who may experience social and structural barriers to participation that also increase their vulnerability to therapeutic optimism. However, little research explores therapeutic optimism within substance use trials. Thus, we conducted a nested qualitative study within an RCT testing a treatment for alcohol and opioid use disorders in HIV clinics. Using interviews with 22 participants in Vancouver, Canada, analysis revealed themes relevant to therapeutic optimism, that were specifically linked to intrinsic (e.g. health-related) or extrinsic motivations (e.g. stipend). First, compared to extrinsically motivated participants, intrinsically motivated participants held high expectations for the trial and attributed greater agency to the study medication. Second, intrinsically motivated participants expressing therapeutic optimism anticipated marked changes in their lives from the study/medication. Finally, some participants predicted the treatment would solve substance-related issues in their communities. These findings highlight the interplay between therapeutic optimism and complex interpretations of RCT objectives among PSUD.

Considering treatment-as-prevention scale-up for Australian prisons: a qualitative sub-study of expert stakeholders from the Australian 'surveillance and treatment of prisoners with hepatitis C' project (SToP-C)

Background

With direct-acting antivirals dramatically reshaping the public health response to the hepatitis C virus (HCV), prisons are set to play a critical role in elimination efforts. Despite the theoretical demonstration of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison in mathematical modeling, limited empirical data exist. The Australian ‘Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C’ project (SToP-C) is the world’s first trial of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison. Drawing on interviews with HCV expert stakeholders, this paper explores the factors respondents identified as crucial to the success of future scale-up. Accounting for such perspectives matters because of the influence expert discourse has in shaping implementation.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nineteen HCV experts working across key policy, advocacy, research and clinical dimensions of the Australian HCV response. Data were coded using qualitative data management software (NVivo 11). Analysis proceeded via a hybrid deductive and inductive approach.

Results

Notwithstanding concerns regarding the lack of primary prevention in Australian prisons, stakeholders reported broad levels of support for the intervention and for the future scale-up of HCV treatment. A number of considerations, both external and internal to the prison system, were identified as key. The principal external factor was an enabling political-cum-policy environment; internal factors included: obtaining support from prisons’ executive and custodial staff; promoting health within a security-first institutional culture; allocating time for treatment within prisoners’ tightly regulated schedules; ensuring institutional stability during treatment given the routine movement of prisoners between prisons; prioritizing the availability of retreatment given the paucity of primary prevention; and securing sufficient clinical space for treatment.

Conclusion

The challenges to implementation are considerable, ranging from macrolevel concerns to in-prison logistical matters. Nonetheless, we argue that prisons remain an obvious setting for treatment scale-up, not only for prevention and potential elimination benefit, but for the treatment opportunities they afford a socially disadvantaged and underserved population. While noting widespread concerns among respondents regarding the paucity of primary prevention in Australian prisons, results indicate broad levels of support among expert stakeholders for HCV treatment scale-up in prison.

Forty-eight years of research on psychosocial interventions in the treatment of opioid use disorder: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Mapped the sources and types of evidence available on psychosocial interventions in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), with and without pharmacotherapies.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for research published until July 1, 2019. Included studies were coded on publication characteristics, evidence sources, treatment settings and modalities, study populations and patient characteristics, intervention(s) offered to patients, research questions addressed in experimental studies, and outcomes investigated.

RESULTS

We identified 305 empirical studies of 54,607 patients. Most studies (64 %; n = 194) compared psychosocial interventions to alternative treatment(s) (183 RCTs and 11 quasi-experiments) while 28 % (n = 86) used observational designs, and 8% (n = 25) used qualitative methods. Trials infrequently investigated effects of stand-alone psychosocial interventions without pharmacotherapies (20% of all RCTs). Regardless of research question or study design, program retention and illicit drug use were the most common outcomes investigated (> 81% of all studies and RCTs), typically among longstanding male heroin users attending specialty outpatient addiction services. Studies rarely examined (a) OUD treatment in general health care or prescription OUD (each < 6 % of all studies and RCTs), (b) effects of social assistance (employment, education, social support) and harm reduction (each < 6 % of studies; < 7 % of RCTs), and (c) health-related quality of life and satisfaction with care (each < 10 % and < 15 % of all studies and RCTs, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Scant evidence is available on the putative rehabilitative effects of psychosocial interventions, either as stand-alone treatments or in an adjunct role to pharmacotherapies.