Patient advocacy and patient centredness in participant recruitment to randomized-controlled trials: implications for informed consent

Strategies to address recruitment to a randomised trial of surgical and non-surgical treatment for cancer: results from a complex recruitment intervention within the Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery 2 (MARS 2) study

OBJECTIVES

Recruiting to randomised trials is often challenging particularly when the intervention arms are markedly different. The Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery 2 randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared standard chemotherapy with or without (extended) pleurectomy decortication surgery for malignant pleural mesothelioma. Anticipating recruitment difficulties, a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention was embedded in the main trial phase to unearth and address barriers. The trial achieved recruitment to target with a 4-month COVID-19 pandemic-related extension. This paper presents the key recruitment challenges, and the strategies delivered to optimise recruitment and informed consent.

DESIGN

A multifaceted, flexible, mixed-method approach to investigate recruitment obstacles drawing on data from staff/patient interviews, audio recorded study recruitment consultations and screening logs. Key findings were translated into strategies targeting identified issues. Data collection, analysis, feedback and strategy implementation continued cyclically throughout the recruitment period.

SETTING

Secondary thoracic cancer care.

RESULTS

Respiratory physicians, oncologists, surgeons and nursing specialists supported the trial, but recruitment challenges were evident. The study had to fit within a framework of a thoracic cancer service considered overstretched where patients encountered multiple healthcare professionals and treatment views, all of which challenged recruitment. Clinician treatment biases, shaped in part by the wider clinical and research context alongside experience, adversely impacted several aspects of the recruitment process by restricting referrals for study consideration, impacting eligibility decisions, affecting the neutrality in which the study and treatment was presented and shaping patient treatment expectations and preferences. Individual and group recruiter feedback and training raised awareness of key equipoise issues, offered support and shared good practice to safeguard informed consent and optimise recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

With bespoke support to overcome identified issues, recruitment to a challenging RCT of surgery versus no surgery in a thoracic cancer setting with a complex recruitment pathway and multiple health professional involvement is possible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN ISRCTN44351742, Clinical Trials.gov NCT02040272.

Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Background

Recruiting patients to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often reported to be challenging, and the evidence base for effective interventions that could be used by staff (recruiters) undertaking recruitment is lacking. Although the experiences and perspectives of recruiters have been widely reported, an evidence synthesis is required in order to inform the development of future interventions. This paper aims to address this by systematically searching and synthesising the evidence on recruiters’ perspectives and experiences of recruiting patients into RCTs. 

Methods

A qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) following Thomas and Harden’s approach to thematic synthesis was conducted. The Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ORRCA and Web of Science electronic databases were searched. Studies were sampled to ensure that the focus of the research was aligned with the phenomena of interest of the QES, their methodological relevance to the QES question, and to include variation across the clinical areas of the studies. The GRADE CERQual framework was used to assess confidence in the review findings.

Results

In total, 9316 studies were identified for screening, which resulted in 128 eligible papers. The application of the QES sampling strategy resulted in 30 papers being included in the final analysis. Five overlapping themes were identified which highlighted the complex manner in which recruiters experience RCT recruitment: (1) recruiting to RCTs in a clinical environment, (2) enthusiasm for the RCT, (3) making judgements about whether to approach a patient, (4) communication challenges, (5) interplay between recruiter and professional roles.

Conclusions

This QES identified factors which contribute to the complexities that recruiters can face in day-to-day clinical settings, and the influence recruiters and non-recruiting healthcare professionals have on opportunities afforded to patients for RCT participation. It has reinforced the importance of considering the clinical setting in its entirety when planning future RCTs and indicated the need to better normalise and support research if it is to become part of day-to-day practice.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42020141297 (registered 11/02/2020).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4.

Emesis in pregnancy - a qualitative study on trial recruitment failure from the EMPOWER internal pilot

BACKGROUND

As part of the internal pilot of the EMPOWER trial investigating the second-line antiemetic therapies in severe emesis in pregnancy ( https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN16924692 ), a qualitative study of women's views was carried out, to improve our understanding of why women did, or did not, consent to participation in the trial. Interviews were also conducted with site research staff, to broaden our analysis and explore other factors affecting recruitment.

METHODS

The sample comprised women who accepted or declined trial participation (n=21) and site research staff (n=22). A structured topic guide was used, in four email interviews and 17 telephone interviews with women, and semi-structured telephone interviews were carried out with staff. Of the women interviewed, seven had declined trial participation, and of the staff interviewed, 16 were research midwives/research nurses and six were principal investigators. All transcripts were checked for accuracy, anonymised and entered into NVIVO12 for indexing and retrieval. Data was analysed using a reflexive thematic analytic approach. In total, 72 codes were generated from the thematic analysis, and 36 from each sample group.

RESULTS

Three key themes based on all the interviews were (a) the diversity of recruitment pathways and boundaries of care, (b) the impact of trial complexity on recruitment and staff morale and (c) the ethics of caring for a patient with emesis. Ethical issues discussed included the use of double dummy and time to treat, particularly those suffering severely from the effects of nausea and vomiting. To illustrate these themes, staff perspectives are given more prominence.

CONCLUSIONS

The main reason the trial was stopped related to the high proportion of women ineligible for recruitment due to prior treatment with study drug(s) because of unanticipated changes in clinical practice. The qualitative results also demonstrate the impact of the trial on women and staff and highlight how the diversity of referral pathways, boundaries of care and the complexity of the trial and protocol resulted in additional barriers to successful trial recruitment. Qualitative work in pilot and feasibility studies of a clinical trial is recommended, to evaluate whether recruitment strategies remain viable in unanticipated contexts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number ISRCTN16924692 . Date: 08/01/2018.

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 .

Process study within a pilot cluster randomised trial in community pharmacy: An exploration of pharmacist readiness for research

INTRODUCTION

Community pharmacies have an increasingly prominent public health function. This includes addressing alcohol, but guidance on delivery of alcohol interventions in this setting is lacking. We have developed an intervention that integrates attention to alcohol within existing community pharmacy medicine review services. This paper examines the experiences of community pharmacists (CPs) in conducting a pilot trial of the intervention, including the acceptability of the trial patient recruitment procedures and the training and support provided by the research team.

METHOD

The pilot trial was conducted in 10 community pharmacies in Yorkshire, England. One CP from each pharmacy was recruited via a multi-stage process to assess motivation, commitment and capacity to participate. Each CP attended a research training day and received on-going research support to conduct the trial. Semi-structured audio-recorded face-to-face interviews (lasting 40-105 min) were conducted with all the CPs at the end of the trial. Data were also available from three direct observations conducted during trial support visits. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The CPs were supportive of research in community pharmacy but had little direct experiences of research themselves. They valued the training and support provided, which had quickly identified areas where CPs were deviating from the study recruitment protocol. In some instances, the boundaries between research and practice became blurred with CPs making changes to their usual routines and interactions with patients to accommodate the research.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial procedures were acceptable to CPs, in part because of the training and support provided. There are also identifiable areas where CPs' readiness for research could be enhanced to facilitate participation in future trials in this setting.

To explore the experience of research nurses who obtain consent from adults in emergency settings to participate in clinical trials, either prospectively or post enrolment

AIM

To explore the understanding and experiences of research nurses who obtain informed consent from adult patients participating in emergency care research.

DESIGN

Qualitative phenomenographic descriptive study.

METHODS

Ten research nurses from six hospitals in England were recruited. Data were collected using semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews between January 2019 and March 2019. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically, informed by phenomenography. COREQ was followed.

RESULTS

Three main themes were identified: (a) emergency research is different, (b) protecting the patient, and (c) experience and confidence with recruitment. It was found that obtaining patient consent in emergency care research was challenging and timing of the process was crucial. Nurses with more experience of emergency care were more confident in approaching patients and their families. There was variability in out-of-hours recruitment which was a consequence of the range of informed consent processes used and the different levels of engagement of clinical teams.

CONCLUSION

There is a variety of organisational cultures, processes and procedures which affect the way consent is obtained in emergency care research. A team approach was evident in the hospitals where consent rates were high and was more successful than those reliant solely on the presence of a research nurse. Organisations were able to recruit successfully to emergency care research studies irrespective of size and configuration. Further investigation of their models of working and strategies for engagement is needed. Experienced research nurses made a positive difference to recruitment and were more likely to approach patients to obtain consent.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The understanding and experiences of recruitment to clinical trials in emergency care research by research nurses can help identify barriers to recruitment. This study provides useful insights for healthcare practitioners, clinical trials coordinators and sponsors about how best to develop protocols and policies to increase recruitment to emergency care research.

Individualising breast cancer treatment to improve survival and minimise complications in older women: a research programme including the PLACE RCT

Background

Over 44,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer annually in the UK. The research comprised three workstreams (WSs) focused on older women.

Maximising survival

WS1 – to identify the role of older women’s and surgeons’ preferences in cancer treatment decisions and whether comorbidity or fitness for surgery has an impact on survival.

Minimising complications

WS2 – to assess multifrequency bioimpedance (BEA) compared with perometry in identifying women predisposed to develop lymphoedema after axillary node clearance (ANC) surgery. WS3 – to assess, in women at risk of lymphoedema, whether or not applying compression garments prevents the onset of lymphoedema.

Design

WS1 – a prospective, consecutive cohort of surgical consultations with women aged ≥ 70 years with operable breast cancer. Interviews and questionnaire surveys of surgeons’ and women’s perceptions of responsibility for treatment decisions (Controlled Preference Score), effects related to survival and secondary outcomes. WS2 – women undergoing ANC for cancer in 21 UK centres underwent baseline and subsequent BEA, and perometer arm measurements and quality-of-life (QoL) assessments. WS3 – a randomised controlled trial testing standard versus applying graduated compression garments to the affected arm, for 1 year, in WS2 patients developing arm swelling.

Setting

Breast outpatient clinics in hospitals with specialist lymphoedema clinics.

Participants

WS1 – patients aged ≥ 70 years with newly diagnosed, operable, invasive breast cancer. WS2 – women with node-positive cancer scheduled to undergo ANC. WS3 – WS2 participants developing a 4–9% increase in arm volume.

Interventions

WS1 – observational study. WS2 – observational study. WS3 – application of graduated compression garments to affected arm, compared with standard management, for 1 year.

Outcomes

WS1 – self-report and clinically assessed health, QoL, complications and survival. WS2 – perometer and bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) measurements, QoL and health utility; and sensitivity and specificity of BIS for detecting lymphoedema compared with perometer arm measurements; in addition, a health economics assessment was performed. WS3 – time to the development of lymphoedema [≥ 10% relative arm-volume increase (RAVI)] from randomisation.

Results

WS1 – overall, 910 women were recruited, but numbers in the substudies differ depending on consent/eligibility. In a study of patient/surgeon choice, 83.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 80.4% to 85.6%] had surgery. Adjusting for health and choice, only women aged > 85 years had reduced odds of surgery [odds ratio (OR) 0.18, 95%CI 0.07 to 0.44]. Patient role in treatment decisions made no difference to receipt of surgery. A qualitative study of women who did not have surgery identified three groups: ‘patient declined’, ‘patient considered’ and ‘surgeon decided’. In a survival substudy, adjusting for tumour stage, comorbidity and functional status, women undergoing surgery had one-third the hazard of dying from cancer. Serious complications from surgery were low and not predicted by older age. In a substudy of the effect of surgical decision-making on HRQoL, 59 (26%) received preferred treatment decision-making style. In multivariate analyses, change in HRQoL was associated neither with congruence (p = 0.133) nor with receipt of surgery (p = 0.841). In a substudy of receipt of chemotherapy in women aged ≥ 65 years, adjusting for tumour characteristics, health measures and choice, women aged ≥ 75 years had reduced odds of chemotherapy (OR 0.06, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.16). WS2 – lymphoedema by 24 months was detected in 21.4% of women by perometry (24.4% sleeve application) and in 39.4% by BIS. Perometer and BIS measurements correlated at 6 months (r = 0.61). Specificity for sleeve application was greater for perometry (94% CI 93% to 96%) at 24 months, as was a positive predictive value of 59% (95% CI 48% to 68%). Lymphoedema diagnosis reduced QoL scores. Sleeve application in the absence of RAVI of > 9% did not improve QoL or symptoms. A composite definition of lymphoedema was developed, comprising a 9% cut-off point for perometer and self-reported considerable swelling. Diagnostic accuracy was ≥ 94% at 6, 12 and 24 months. WS3 – the PLACE (Prevention of Lymphoedema After Clearance of External compression) trial recruited 143 patients, but recruitment was slow and closed early on the advice of the Independent Data Monitoring Committee. A qualitative substudy identified a number of barriers to recruitment.

Conclusions

Half of older patients felt that they influenced decisions about their treatment. No relationship between decision preference being fulfilled and HRQoL in elderly patients diagnosed with cancer occurred, and older age did not predict complications. Primary surgery reduced the hazard of dying of cancer by two-thirds, independent of age, health and tumour characteristics. Women aged ≥ 75 years have reduced odds of receiving chemotherapy. Lymphoedema (along with a BMI of > 30 kg/m2, cigarette smoking and chemotherapy) reduces QoL. Changes in arm volume of > 9% predicted lymphoedema requiring and benefiting from sleeve application. The PLACE trial qualitative work provides a number of insights into problems of recruitment that were specific to this trial (stigma of compression garments) but that are also generalisable to other RCTs.

Limitations

Both WS1 and WS2 were large, multicentre, UK cohort, observational studies. The WS3 PLACE trial has not reported yet but closed with approximately half of the patients originally planned.

Future work

Research producing objective measures for sleeve prescription in the NHS is required.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48880939.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 7, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Additional support for WS1 came from a Breast Cancer Campaign Grant and a NIHR Postdoctoral Fellowship. ImpediMed (Carslbad, CA, USA;www.impedimed.com) provided bioimpedance L-Dex®machines and electrodes for the study and Sigvaris provided the external compression garments free of charge for the (PLACE) trial.

Motivators and challenges to research recruitment - A qualitative study with midwives

OBJECTIVE

To explore midwives' experiences of recruiting participants to research studies conducted by other researchers.

DESIGN

An inductive qualitative study.

METHODS

Individual face-to-face or telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were analysed thematically.

SETTINGS

One large urban maternity hospital in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

A purposive sample of 19 midwives FINDINGS: Three co-dependent themes emerged: intrinsic motivations, extrinsic motivations and challenges. Intrinsic motivations included midwives' personal beliefs about the value of research in general, its potential to improve practice, and their perceptions of how robust a particular study was and how it might impact on an individual woman and her baby. This included an inherent desire to shield some women, those who were perceived to have ongoing health issues or be anticipating a sub-optimal pregnancy outcome, from being offered study information. Extrinsic motivations related to the complexity of a research study and a specific researcher's characteristics. Challenges to offering potential participants research study information and, therefore, to successful recruitment included time constraints, workload and the volume of research being conducted simultaneously.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Participants navigated the two, sometimes competing, worlds of clinical practice and clinical research. Set in the context of workload and the volume of research being conducted simultaneously, midwives' perceptions of a study's robustness, clarity, its potential impact on individual women and ability to improve practice governed their motivation to offer information on research studies to potential participants.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Inviting clinicians to assess the study information may improve its clarity and create opportunities to discuss the potential value and recruitment bias. Researchers should be available to address clinicians' questions about particular research studies. At an organisational level, a system for managing the volume of research activity is required.

Should I stay or should I go? A qualitative study exploring participation in a urology clinical trial

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to identify modifiable factors to improve recruitment in a urology clinical trial of women with recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI). An embedded qualitative study was conducted with patients and recruiting clinicians in the first 8 months of the trial. We present a matrix of factors influencing how patients make decisions about trial participation.

Methods

This was a qualitative study using telephone interviews. When they were first approached about the trial, women were asked to complete an expression of interest form if they wished to be contacted for an interview. Data were analysed thematically. NVivo 10 software (Qualitative data analysis software. 10th ed: QSR International Pty Ltd; 2012) was used as a management tool.

Results

Thirty patients and 11 clinicians were interviewed. Influences on patient participation included the impact of rUTI on quality of life (QoL), understanding of antibiotic resistance, and previous experiences with antibiotics either positive or negative. Very few women who declined the trial agreed to be interviewed. However, some of those who participated had reservations about it. These included the perceived risk of trying a new treatment, trial length, and the burden of participating. One person interviewed left the trial because of repeated infections and difficulties getting general practitioner appointments.

Conclusions

A combination of factors worked to influence women to decide to participate, to remain in, or to leave the trial. A better understanding of how these factors interact and work can assist in the recruitment and retention of individual trial participants.

"Telling" and assent: Parents' attitudes towards children's participation in a birth cohort study

INTRODUCTION

One of the ethical issues surrounding birth cohort studies is how to obtain informed assent from children as they grow up. What and how parents tell their children affects children's future choices about the study, yet few studies have focused on parents' influence on children.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines parents' attitudes towards telling their children about their participation in a specific birth cohort study.

METHODS

We conducted surveys and in-depth interviews with the parents of children who participated in the "Japan Environment and Children's Study" (JECS), which follows children from the foetal stage to age 13.

RESULTS

Forty-four mothers and 23 fathers answered the survey, and 11 mothers and 3 fathers participated in in-depth interviews. Parents' attitudes towards "telling" were categorized into 3 communication styles depending on their perception of the risk/benefits for their children. Most parents predicted that the study would benefit their children and preferred "directive telling," which we divided into "empowered telling" (provides children with a positive identity as participants) and "persuasive telling" (attempts to persuade children even if they express reluctance as they grow). A few parents, weighing the study's potential risk, preferred "non-directive telling," which respects children's choices even if that means withdrawing from the study.

DISCUSSION

While "directive telling" may lead children to have positive associations with the study, children should also be told about the risks. Investigators can provide materials that support parents and give children age-appropriate information about their participation, as well as ensure opportunities for children to express their feelings.

Professional identity and the Clinical Research Nurse: A qualitative study exploring issues having an impact on participant recruitment in research

AIMS

The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of Clinical Research Nurses, with an emphasis on factors that may have an impact on successful study delivery.

BACKGROUND

The Clinical Research Nurse workforce is pivotal to improving health outcomes through supporting research-active health economies. Investment in research infrastructure has led to nurses and midwives increasingly undertaking extended roles to deliver clinical research. Despite such opportunities, the recruitment of sufficient participants into research studies remains problematic. A growing body of literature is exploring barriers to successful study delivery, indicating the emergence of a caring-recruiting dichotomy in clinical research staff.

DESIGN

This qualitative study investigates the experiences of Clinical Research Nurses delivering research in the United Kingdom National Health Service.

METHODS

Four Focus groups (total 19 participants) were conducted in a large North East National Health Service Foundation Trust from November 2015 - February 2016.

FINDINGS

Thematic analysis identified perceptions of the role in the wider context of professional identity. Role transition, altered relationships and workload complexity, affected participants' practice, leading to inconsistency between core clinical values and perceived identities as research delivery staff. A duty of care as patient advocates contrasted elements of the work reflecting that of salespeople. The emotional labour of approaching patients and unease regarding peer perceptions of the Clinical Research Nurse role, affected the positive aspects of research delivery.

CONCLUSION

Professional-identity and self-concept appear to have an impact on practice in a research delivery role. Further research should explore these issues further, to enlighten the basis on which such feelings are positioned and to work towards practical solutions.

A qualitative study examining healthcare managers and providers' perspectives on participating in primary care implementation research

BACKGROUND

Primary care reforms should be supported by high-quality evidence across the entire life cycle of research. Front-line healthcare providers play an increasing role in implementation research. We recently evaluated two interventions for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in partnership with four Primary Care Networks (PCNs) in Alberta, Canada. Here, we report healthcare professionals perspectives on participating in primary care implementation research.

METHODS

Guided by the RE-AIM framework, we collected qualitative data before, during, and after both interventions. We conducted 34 in-person or telephone interviews with 17 individual PCN professionals. We used content analysis to identify emerging codes and concepts.

RESULTS

Two major themes emerged from the data. First, healthcare managers were eager to conduct implementation research in a primary care setting. Second, regardless of willingness to conduct research, there were challenges to implementing experimental study designs for both interventions. PCN professionals presumed the interventions were better than usual care, expressed role conflict, and reported administrative burdens related to research participation. Perceptions of patient vulnerability and an obligation to intervene exacerbated these issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals with limited practical research experience might not foresee the challenges in implementing experimental study designs in primary care settings to generate high-quality evidence. These issues are intensified when healthcare professionals perceive target patient populations as vulnerable and in need of intervention based on the presenting illness. Possible solutions include further research training, involving healthcare professionals in study design development, and using non-clinical staff to conduct research activities, particularly among acutely unwell patient populations.

Consent revisited: the impact of return of results on participants' views and expectations about trial participation

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, the sharing of study results with participants is advocated as an element of good research practice. Yet little is known about how receiving the results of trials may impact on participants' perceptions of their original decision to consent.

OBJECTIVE

We explored participants' views of their decision to consent to a clinical trial after they received results showing adverse outcomes in some arms of the trial.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 38 women in the UK who participated in a trial of antibiotics in pregnancy. All had received results from a follow-up study that reported increased risk of adverse outcomes for children of participants in some of the trial intervention arms. Data analysis was based on the constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Participants' original decisions to consent to the trial had been based on hope of personal benefit and assumptions of safety. On receiving the results, most made sense of their experience in ways that enabled them to remain content with their decision to take part. But for some, the results provoked recognition that their original expectations might have been mistaken or that they had not understood the implications of their decision to participate. These participants experienced guilt, a sense of betrayal by the maternity staff and researchers involved in the trial, and damage to trust.

CONCLUSIONS

Sharing of study results is not a wholly benign practice, and requires careful development of suitable approaches for further evaluation before widespread adoption.

Training recruiters to randomized trials to facilitate recruitment and informed consent by exploring patients' treatment preferences

BACKGROUND

Patients' treatment preferences are often cited as barriers to recruitment in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We investigated how RCT recruiters reacted to patients' treatment preferences and identified key strategies to improve informed decision-making and trial recruitment.

METHODS

Audio-recordings of 103 RCT recruitment appointments with 96 participants in three UK multicenter pragmatic RCTs were analyzed using content and thematic analysis. Recruiters' responses to expressed treatment preferences were assessed in one RCT (ProtecT - Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment) in which training on exploring preferences had been given, and compared with two other RCTs where this specific training had not been given.

RESULTS

Recruiters elicited treatment preferences similarly in all RCTs but responses to expressed preferences differed substantially. In the ProtecT RCT, patients' preferences were not accepted at face value but were explored and discussed at length in three key ways: eliciting and acknowledging the preference rationale, balancing treatment views, and emphasizing the need to keep an open mind and consider all treatments. By exploring preferences, recruiters enabled participants to become clearer about whether their views were robust enough to be sustained or were sufficiently weak that participation in the RCT became possible. Conversely, in the other RCTs, treatment preferences were often readily accepted without further discussion or understanding the reasoning behind them, suggesting that patients were not given the opportunity to fully consider all treatments and trial participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruiters can be trained to elicit and address patients' treatment preferences, enabling those who may not have considered trial participation to do so. Without specific guidance, some RCT recruiters are likely to accept initial preferences at face value, missing opportunities to promote more informed decision-making. Training interventions for recruiters that incorporate key strategies to manage treatment preferences, as in the ProtecT study, are required to facilitate recruitment and informed consent.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ProtecT RCT: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN20141297. The other two trials are registered but have asked to be anonymized.

The intellectual challenges and emotional consequences of equipoise contributed to the fragility of recruitment in six randomized controlled trials

Objective

The aim of the study was to investigate how doctors considered and experienced the concept of equipoise while recruiting patients to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Study Design and Setting

In-depth interviews with 32 doctors in six publicly funded pragmatic RCTs explored their perceptions of equipoise as they undertook RCT recruitment. The RCTs varied in size, duration, type of complex intervention, and clinical specialties. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content and thematic analytical methods derived from grounded theory and synthesized across six RCTs.

Results

All six RCTs suffered from poor recruitment. Doctors wanted to gather robust evidence but experienced considerable discomfort and emotion in relation to their clinical instincts and concerns about patient eligibility and safety. Although they relied on a sense of community equipoise to justify participation, most acknowledged having “hunches” about particular treatments and patients, some of which undermined recruitment. Surgeons experienced these issues most intensely. Training and support promoted greater confidence in equipoise and improved engagement and recruitment.

Conclusion

Recruitment to RCTs is a fragile process and difficult for doctors intellectually and emotionally. Training and support can enable most doctors to become comfortable with key RCT concepts including equipoise, uncertainty, patient eligibility, and randomization, promoting a more resilient recruitment process in partnership with patients.

Clear obstacles and hidden challenges: understanding recruiter perspectives in six pragmatic randomised controlled trials

Background

Recruitment of sufficient participants in an efficient manner is still widely acknowledged to be a major challenge to the mounting and completion of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Few recruitment interventions have involved staff undertaking recruitment. This study aimed i) to understand the recruitment process from the perspective of recruiters actively recruiting RCT participants in six pragmatic RCTs, and ii) to identify opportunities for interventions to improve recruitment.

Methods

Interviews were undertaken with 72 individuals (32 doctors or RCT Chief investigators (CIs); 40 nurses/other health professionals) who were actively recruiting participants in six RCTs to explore their experiences of recruitment. The RCTs varied in scale, duration, and clinical contexts. Interviews were fully transcribed and analysed using qualitative content and thematic analytic methods derived from grounded theory. For this analysis, data were systematically extracted from each RCT and synthesised across all six RCTs to produce a detailed and nuanced understanding of the recruitment process from the perspectives of the recruiters.

Results

Recruiters readily identified organisational difficulties, fewer than expected eligible patients, and patients’ treatment preferences as the key barriers to recruitment. As they described their experiences of recruitment, several previously hidden issues related to their roles as researchers and clinicians emerged, imbued with discomfort and emotion. The synthesis across the RCTs showed that doctors were uncomfortable about aspects of patient eligibility and the effectiveness of interventions, whereas nurses were anxious about approaching potential RCT participants and conflicts between the research and their clinical responsibilities. Recruiters seemed unaware that their views contributed to recruitment difficulties. Their views were not known to RCT CIs. Training and support needs were identified for both groups of staff.

Conclusions

The synthesis showed that recruitment to these RCTs was a complex and fragile process. Clear obstacles were identified but hidden challenges related to recruiters’ roles undermined recruitment, unbeknown to RCT CIs. Qualitative research can elicit and identify the hidden challenges. Training and support are then needed for recruiters to become more comfortable with the design and principles of RCTs, so that they can engage more openly with potentially eligible participants and create a more resilient recruitment process.

An international survey of physicians regarding clinical trials: a comparison between Kyoto University Hospital and Seoul National University Hospital

Background

International clinical trials are now rapidly expanding into Asia. However, the proportion of global trials is higher in South Korea compared to Japan despite implementation of similar governmental support in both countries. The difference in clinical trial environment might influence the respective physicians’ attitudes and experience towards clinical trials. Therefore, we designed a questionnaire to explore how physicians conceive the issues surrounding clinical trials in both countries.

Methods

A questionnaire survey was conducted at Kyoto University Hospital (KUHP) and Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) in 2008. The questionnaire consisted of 15 questions and 2 open-ended questions on broad key issues relating to clinical trials.

Results

The number of responders was 301 at KUHP and 398 at SNUH. Doctors with trial experience were 196 at KUHP and 150 at SNUH. Among them, 12% (24/196) at KUHP and 41% (61/150) at SUNH had global trial experience. Most respondents at both institutions viewed clinical trials favorably and thought that conducting clinical trials contributed to medical advances, which would ultimately lead to new and better treatments. The main reason raised as a hindrance to conducting clinical trials was the lack of personnel support and time. Doctors at both university hospitals thought that more clinical research coordinators were required to conduct clinical trials more efficiently. KUHP doctors were driven mainly by pure academic interest or for their desire to find new treatments, while obtaining credits for board certification and co-authorship on manuscripts also served as motivation factors for doctors at SNUH.

Conclusions

Our results revealed that there might be two different approaches to increase clinical trial activity. One is a social level approach to establish clinical trial infrastructure providing sufficient clinical research professionals. The other is an individual level approach that would provide incentives to encourage doctors to participate in and conduct clinical trials.