What are research nurses' experiences of obtaining consent from or for patients participating in emergency care research? A qualitative review

Pregabalin vs placebo to prevent chronic pain after whiplash injury in at-risk individuals: results of a feasibility study for a large randomised controlled trial

ABSTRACT

There are few effective treatments for acute whiplash-associated disorders (WADs). Early features of central sensitisation predict poor recovery. The effect of pregabalin on central sensitisation might prevent chronic pain after acute whiplash injury. This double blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial examined feasibility and potential effectiveness of pregabalin compared with placebo for people with acute WAD. Twenty-four participants with acute WAD (<48 hours) and at risk of poor recovery (pain ≥5/10) were recruited from hospital emergency departments in Queensland, Australia, and randomly assigned by concealed allocation to either pregabalin (n = 10) or placebo (n = 14). Pregabalin was commenced at 75 mg bd, titrated to 300 mg bd for 4 weeks, and then weaned over 1 week. Participants were assessed at 5 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. Feasibility issues included recruitment difficulties and greater attrition in the placebo group. For the primary clinical outcome of neck pain intensity, attrition at 5 weeks was pregabalin: 10% and placebo: 36% and at 12 months was pregabalin: 10% and placebo: 43%. Pregabalin may be more effective than placebo for the primary clinical outcome of neck pain intensity at 3 months (mean difference: -4.0 [95% confidence interval -6.2 to -1.7]) on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale. Effects were maintained at 6 months but not 12 months. There were no serious adverse events. Minor adverse events were more common in the pregabalin group. A definitive large randomised controlled trial of pregabalin for acute whiplash injury is warranted. Feasibility issues would need to be addressed with modifications to the protocol.

Stakeholder perspectives on barriers and enablers to recruiting anxious children undergoing day surgery under general anaesthetic: a qualitative internal pilot study of the MAGIC randomised controlled trial

Background

The ‘Melatonin for Anxiety prior to General anaesthesia In Children’ (MAGIC) trial was designed to compare midazolam and melatonin as pre-medications for anxious children (aged five to fourteen), undergoing day-case surgical procedures under general anaesthesia. Low recruitment is a challenge for many trials, particularly paediatric trials and those in ‘emergency’ settings. A qualitative study as part of MAGIC aimed to gather stakeholder perspectives on barriers and enablers to recruitment.

Methods

Sixteen stakeholders from six sites participated in semi-structured interviews about their experiences of setting up the MAGIC trial and recruiting patients as part of the internal pilot. Data was analysed using framework analysis.

Results

Participants identified barriers and enablers to recruitment. Barriers and enablers related to the study, participants, the population of anxious children, practitioners, collaboration with other health professionals, ethics, specific settings and the context of surgical day units and the wider health system. Attempting to recruit anxious children from a surgical day unit is particularly challenging for several reasons. Issues include the practicalities of dealing with a child experiencing anxiety for parents/guardians; professional unwillingness to make things more difficult for families and clinicians and nurses valuing predictability within a busy and time-sensitive setting.

Conclusions

Multi-site RCTs face recruitment barriers relating to study-wide and site-specific factors. There are multiple barriers to recruiting anxious children due to undergo day-case surgery. Barriers across domains can interrelate and reinforce each other, reflecting challenges relating to populations and settings. For example, in the case of anxious children, parents and other health professionals are concerned about exacerbating children’s anxiety prior to surgery. They may look for ways to keep things predictable and avoid the uncertainty of an RCT. Pre-trial engagement work could help address concerns among collaborating health professionals.

Using rapid ethnography during set-up or an internal pilot to focus on how the protocol will be or has been operationalised in practice may help identify issues. Allowing time to reflect on the findings of internal pilots and implement necessary changes could facilitate higher recruitment during the main phase of a trial.

Trial registration

NIHR Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN18296119. Registered on October 01, 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05425-z.