1
|
Arundel CE, Clark LK, Parker A, Beard D, Coleman E, Cooper C, Devane D, Eldridge S, Galvin S, Gillies K, Hewitt CE, Sutton C, Torgerson DJ, Treweek S. Trial Forge Guidance 4: a guideline for reporting the results of randomised Studies Within A Trial (SWATs). Trials 2024; 25:183. [PMID: 38475795 PMCID: PMC10935912 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08004-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence to support decisions on trial processes is minimal. One way to generate this evidence is to use a Study Within A Trial (SWAT) to test trial processes or explore methodological uncertainties. SWAT evidence relies on replication to ensure sufficient power and broad applicability of findings. Prompt reporting is therefore essential; however, SWAT publications are often the first to be abandoned in the face of other time pressures. Reporting guidance for embedded methodology trials does exist but is not widely used. We sought therefore to build on these guidelines to develop a straightforward, concise reporting standard, which remains adherent to the CONSORT guideline. METHODS An iterative process was used to develop the guideline. This included initial meetings with key stakeholders, development of an initial guideline, pilot testing of draft guidelines, further iteration and pilot testing, and finalisation of the guideline. RESULTS We developed a reporting guideline applicable to randomised SWATs, including replications of previous evaluations. The guideline follows the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and provides example text to ensure ease and clarity of reporting across all domains. CONCLUSIONS The SWAT reporting guideline will aid authors, reviewers, and journal editors to produce and review clear, structured reports of randomised SWATs, whilst also adhering to the CONSORT guideline. TRIAL REGISTRATION EQUATOR Network - Guidelines Under Development ( https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials/#SWAT ). Registered on 25 March 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C E Arundel
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
| | - L K Clark
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - A Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - D Beard
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford, UK
| | - E Coleman
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - C Cooper
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - D Devane
- HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
- Evidence Synthesis Ireland and Cochrane Ireland, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - S Eldridge
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - S Galvin
- HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - K Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - C E Hewitt
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - C Sutton
- School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - D J Torgerson
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Lower Ground Floor ARRC Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - S Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bessell E, Markovic TP, Caterson ID, Hendy C, Burk J, Picone T, Fuller NR. Cost-effectiveness analysis of recruitment strategies in a large diabetes prevention trial conducted across two sites in Sydney, Australia. Contemp Clin Trials 2024; 137:107421. [PMID: 38145712 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107421] [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: 09/23/2023] [Revised: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetes prevention trials require large samples and community-based recruitment, which can be protracted and expensive. We analysed the cost-effectiveness of recruitment strategies used in a randomised placebo-controlled supplement trial in adults with prediabetes and overweight or obesity conducted in Sydney, Australia. METHODS Recruitment strategies included advertising through local radio stations and newspapers, television news coverage, online advertising and editorials, advertising in and referral from primary care settings, university- and hospital-based advertising, and attending or hosting local events. For each strategy, the number of expressions of interest, screenings booked, and randomised participants were collated. The percentage contribution from each strategy, overall cost, and cost per participant were calculated. RESULTS Of 4498 expressions of interest, 551 (12%) were eligible for onsite screening and 401 (9%) were randomised. Recruitment costs totalled AU$218,501, averaging AU$545 per participant. The recruitment strategy was recorded for 49% who expressed interest in the trial, and for 75% randomised into the trial. From these data, advertising on local radio stations was the most cost-effective strategy, contributing 46% of participants at AU$286 per participant, then advertising in and referral from primary care settings (57 participants [19%], AU$1438 per participant). The least cost-effective strategy was television news coverage, which was not targeted to the Sydney-based audience, contributing only six participants (AU$10,000 per participant). CONCLUSION Radio advertising and recruitment through healthcare were the most effective recruitment strategies in this trial. Recruitment strategies should be location-specific and appropriate for the target population, prioritising low-effort high-yield strategies. Trial investigators should seek opportunities for free advertising.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erica Bessell
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia.
| | - Tania P Markovic
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia; Metabolism & Obesity Service, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Ian D Caterson
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia; Metabolism & Obesity Service, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Chelsea Hendy
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| | - Jessica Burk
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| | - Tegan Picone
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| | - Nicholas R Fuller
- The University of Sydney, The Boden Initiative, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Krukowski RA, Ross KM, Western MJ, Cooper R, Busse H, Forbes C, Kuntsche E, Allmeta A, Silva AM, John-Akinola YO, König LM. Digital health interventions for all? Examining inclusivity across all stages of the digital health intervention research process. Trials 2024; 25:98. [PMID: 38291539 PMCID: PMC10826214 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-07937-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Digital interventions offer many possibilities for improving health, as remote interventions can enhance reach and access to underserved groups of society. However, research evaluating digital health interventions demonstrates that such technologies do not equally benefit all and that some in fact seem to reinforce a "digital health divide." By better understanding these potential pitfalls, we may contribute to narrowing the digital divide in health promotion. The aim of this article is to highlight and reflect upon study design decisions that might unintentionally enhance inequities across key research stages-recruitment, enrollment, engagement, efficacy/effectiveness, and retention. To address the concerns highlighted, we propose strategies including (1) the standard definition of "effectiveness" should be revised to include a measure of inclusivity; (2) studies should report a broad range of potential inequity indicators of participants recruited, randomized, and retained and should conduct sensitivity analyses examining potential sociodemographic differences for both the effect and engagement of the digital interventions; (3) participants from historically marginalized groups should be involved in the design of study procedures, including those related to recruitment, consent, intervention implementation and engagement, assessment, and retention; (4) eligibility criteria should be minimized and carefully selected and the screening process should be streamlined; (5) preregistration of trials should include recruitment benchmarks for sample diversity and comprehensive lists of sociodemographic characteristics assessed; and (6) studies within trials should be embedded to systematically test recruitment and retention strategies to improve inclusivity. The implementation of these strategies would enhance the ability of digital health trials to recruit, randomize, engage, and retain a broader and more representative population in trials, ultimately minimizing the digital divide and broadly improving population health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca A Krukowski
- Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Virginia, PO Box 800765, Charlottesville, VA, 22908-0765, USA.
| | - Kathryn M Ross
- Department of Clinical & Health Psychology, College of Public Health & Health Professions, University of Florida, PO Box 100165, Gainesville, FL, 32610-0165, USA
| | - Max J Western
- Department for Health, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
| | - Rosie Cooper
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Road, Oxford, UK
| | - Heide Busse
- Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology- BIPS, Achterstraße 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany
| | - Cynthia Forbes
- Hull York Medical School, University of Hull, Allam Medical Building, Cottingham Road, Hull, UK
| | - Emmanuel Kuntsche
- Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University, Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Melbourne, 3086 VIC, Australia
| | - Anila Allmeta
- University of Bayreuth, Fritz-Hornschuch-Straße 13, 95326, Kulmbach, Germany
| | - Anabelle Macedo Silva
- Instituto de Estudos Em Saúde Coletiva IESC/ Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro /Leibiniz Science Campus Digital Public Health/Ministério Público Do Estado Do Rio de Janeiro, Rua das Bauhineas 200, Bl B 1602, Península, Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro, 22776-090, Brazil
| | - Yetunde O John-Akinola
- Department of Health Promotion and Education, Faculty of Public Health, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, College of Medicine, Queen Elizabeth Road, UCH Campus, Ibadan, Nigeria
| | - Laura M König
- University of Bayreuth, Faculty of Life Sciences: Food, Nutrition and Health University of Vienna, Faculty of Psychology, Wächtergasse 1, 1010, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Parker A, Arundel C, Clark L, Coleman E, Doherty L, Hewitt CE, Beard D, Bower P, Cooper C, Culliford L, Devane D, Emsley R, Eldridge S, Galvin S, Gillies K, Montgomery A, Sutton CJ, Treweek S, Torgerson DJ. Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme. Health Technol Assess 2024; 28:1-114. [PMID: 38327177 PMCID: PMC11017159 DOI: 10.3310/htqw3107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Randomised controlled trials ('trials') are susceptible to poor participant recruitment and retention. Studies Within A Trial are the strongest methods for testing the effectiveness of strategies to improve recruitment and retention. However, relatively few of these have been conducted. Objectives PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to facilitate at least 25 Studies Within A Trial evaluating recruitment or retention strategies. We share our experience of delivering the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme, and the lessons learnt for undertaking randomised Studies Within A Trial. Design A network of 10 Clinical Trials Units and 1 primary care research centre committed to conducting randomised controlled Studies Within A Trial of recruitment and/or retention strategies was established. Promising recruitment and retention strategies were identified from various sources including Cochrane systematic reviews, the Study Within A Trial Repository, and existing prioritisation exercises, which were reviewed by patient and public members to create an initial priority list of seven recruitment and eight retention interventions. Host trial teams could apply for funding and receive support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to undertake Studies Within A Trial. We also tested the feasibility of undertaking co-ordinated Studies Within A Trial, across multiple host trials simultaneously. Setting Clinical trials unit-based trials recruiting or following up participants in any setting in the United Kingdom were eligible. Participants Clinical trials unit-based teams undertaking trials in any clinical context in the United Kingdom. Interventions Funding of up to £5000 and support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to design, implement and report Studies Within A Trial. Main outcome measures Number of host trials funded. Results Forty-two Studies Within A Trial were funded (31 host trials), across 12 Clinical Trials Units. The mean cost of a Study Within A Trial was £3535. Twelve Studies Within A Trial tested the same strategy across multiple host trials using a co-ordinated Study Within A Trial design, and four used a factorial design. Two recruitment and five retention strategies were evaluated in more than one host trial. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial will add 18% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane systematic review of recruitment strategies, and 79% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane review of retention strategies. For retention, we found that pre-notifying participants by card, letter or e-mail before sending questionnaires was effective, as was the use of pens, and sending personalised text messages to improve questionnaire response. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others planning Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient and public involvement partners; prioritising and selecting strategies to evaluate and elements to consider when designing a Study Within A Trial; obtaining governance approvals; implementing Studies Within A Trial, including individual and co-ordinated Studies Within A Trials; and reporting Study Within A Trials. Limitations The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted five Studies Within A Trial, being either delayed (n = 2) or prematurely terminated (n = 3). Conclusions PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial significantly increased the evidence base for recruitment and retention strategies. When provided with both funding and practical support, host trial teams successfully implemented Studies Within A Trial. Future work Future research should identify and target gaps in the evidence base, including widening Study Within A Trial uptake, undertaking more complex Studies Within A Trial and translating Study Within A Trial evidence into practice. Study registration All Studies Within A Trial in the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme had to be registered with the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research Study Within A Trial Repository. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/55/80) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adwoa Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Catherine Arundel
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Laura Clark
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Elizabeth Coleman
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Laura Doherty
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | - David Beard
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Science, NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Cindy Cooper
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Lucy Culliford
- Bristol Trials Centre, Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, UK
| | - Declan Devane
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Republic of Ireland
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Republic of Ireland
| | - Richard Emsley
- Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Sandra Galvin
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Republic of Ireland
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Republic of Ireland
| | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Foresthill, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Alan Montgomery
- University of Nottingham, Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University Park Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK
| | | | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Foresthill, Aberdeen, UK
| | - David J Torgerson
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Madurasinghe VW, Knapp P, Eldridge S, Collier D, Treweek S, Rick J, Graffy J, Parker A, Salisbury C, Torgerson D, Jolly K, Sidhu MS, Fife-Schaw C, Hull MA, Sprange K, Brettell E, Bhandari S, Montgomery A, Bower P. Can we achieve better trial recruitment by presenting patient information through multimedia? Meta-analysis of 'studies within a trial' (SWATs). BMC Med 2023; 21:425. [PMID: 37940944 PMCID: PMC10634086 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-03081-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND People need high-quality information to make decisions about research participation. Providing information in written format alone is conventional but may not be the most effective and acceptable approach. We developed a structure for the presentation of information using multimedia which included generic and trial-specific content. Our aim was to embed 'Studies Within A Trial' (SWATs) across multiple ongoing trials to test whether multimedia presentation of patient information led to better rates of recruitment. METHODS Five trials included a SWAT and randomised their participants to receive a multimedia presentation alongside standard information, or standard written information alone. We collected data on trial recruitment, acceptance and retention and analysed the pooled results using random effects meta-analysis, with the primary outcome defined as the proportion of participants randomised following an invitation to take part. RESULTS Five SWATs provided data on the primary outcome of proportion of participants randomised. Multimedia alongside written information results in little or no difference in recruitment rates (pooled odds ratio = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.17, p-value = 0.671, I2 = 0%). There was no effect on any other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Multimedia alongside written information did not improve trial recruitment rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN71952900, ISRCTN 06710391, ISRCTN 17160087, ISRCTN05926847, ISRCTN62869767.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vichithranie W Madurasinghe
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York & the Hull York Medical School, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Clinical Trials and Methodology, Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| | - David Collier
- Barts NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, 3Rd Floor, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK
| | - Jo Rick
- National Institute of Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Jonathan Graffy
- General Practitioner Arbury Road Surgery 114, Arbury Road, Cambridge, CB4 2JG, UK
| | - Adwoa Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Chris Salisbury
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK
| | - David Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Kate Jolly
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Manbinder S Sidhu
- Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
| | | | - Mark A Hull
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Kirsty Sprange
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
| | - Elizabeth Brettell
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Sunil Bhandari
- Department of Renal Medicine, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, and Hull York Medical School, Hull, East Yorkshire, HU3 2JZ, UK
| | - Alan Montgomery
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- NIHR School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Jones TL, Edbrooke L, Rawstorn JC, Hayes SC, Maddison R, Denehy L, Short CE. Self-efficacy, motivation, and habits: psychological correlates of exercise among women with breast cancer. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:584. [PMID: 37728796 PMCID: PMC10511352 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08040-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 09/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this analysis was to explore associations between exercise behaviour among breast cancer survivors and three behavioural constructs from distinct theories: self-efficacy from social cognitive theory, motivation from self-determination theory, and habits from habit theory. METHODS Breast cancer survivors (n = 204) completed a cross-sectional survey that collected demographic and disease characteristics, exercise levels, and self-efficacy, motivation, and habits. Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify constructs associated with total activity and resistance training. RESULTS Participants were a mean (SD) age of 57.3 (10.8) years and most were diagnosed with early-stage disease (72%) and engaged in sufficient levels of total activity (94%), though only 45% completed ≥ 2 resistance training sessions/week. Identified motivation (ꞵ[95% CI] = 7.6 [3.9-11.3]) and habits (ꞵ[95% CI] = 4.4 [1.4-7.4]) were significantly associated with total activity (as were body mass index and disease stage), whilst identified motivation (ꞵ[95% CI] = 0.6 [0.3-0.9]) and coping self-efficacy (ꞵ[95% CI] = 0.02 [< 0.01-0.03]) were significantly associated with resistance training. The models explained 27% and 16% of variance in total activity and resistance training behaviour, respectively. CONCLUSION Results suggest that incorporating strategies that support identified motivation, habits, and coping self-efficacy in future interventions could promote increased exercise behaviour among breast cancer populations. Future longitudinal research should examine associations with exercise in a more representative, population-based sample.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamara L Jones
- Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Lara Edbrooke
- Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, The Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Rawstorn
- Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sandra C Hayes
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
- School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Ralph Maddison
- Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Linda Denehy
- Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, The Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Camille E Short
- Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pérez-Muñoz A, Horn TL, Graber J, Chowdhury SMR, Bursac Z, Krukowski RA. Recruitment strategies for a post cessation weight management trial: A comparison of strategy cost-effectiveness and sample diversity. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2022; 30:101037. [DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.101037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2022] [Revised: 09/28/2022] [Accepted: 11/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
|
8
|
Moe-Byrne T, Knapp P, Perry D, Achten J, Spoors L, Appelbe D, Roche J, Martin-Kerry JM, Sheridan R, Higgins S. Does digital, multimedia information increase recruitment and retention in a children's wrist fracture treatment trial, and what do people think of it? A randomised controlled Study Within A Trial (SWAT). BMJ Open 2022; 12:e057508. [PMID: 35831055 PMCID: PMC9280884 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate digital, multimedia information (MMI) for its effects on trial recruitment, retention, decisions about participation and acceptability by patients, compared with printed information. DESIGN Study Within A Trial using random cluster allocation within the Forearm Fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) study. SETTING Emergency departments in 23 UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS 1409 children aged 4-16 years attending with a torus (buckle) fracture, and their parents/guardian. Children's mean age was 9.2 years, 41.0% were female, 77.4% were ethnically White and 90.0% spoke English as a first language. INTERVENTIONS Participants and their parents/guardian received trial information either via multimedia, including animated videos, talking head videos and text (revised for readability and age appropriateness when needed) on tablet computer (MMI group; n=681), or printed participant information sheet (PIS group; n=728). OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome was recruitment rate to FORCE. Secondary outcomes were Decision-Making Questionnaire (nine Likert items, analysed summatively and individually), three 'free text' questions (deriving subjective evaluations) and trial retention. RESULTS MMI produced a small, not statistically significant increase in recruitment: 475 (69.8%) participants were recruited from the MMI group; 484 (66.5%) from the PIS group (OR=1.35; 95% CI 0.76 to 2.40, p=0.31). A total of 324 (23.0%) questionnaires were returned and analysed. There was no difference in total Decision-Making Questionnaire scores: adjusted mean difference 0.05 (95% CI -1.23 to 1.32, p=0.94). The MMI group was more likely to report the information 'very easy' to understand (89; 57.8% vs 67; 39.4%; Z=2.60, p=0.01) and identify information that was explained well (96; 62.3% vs 71; 41.8%). Almost all FORCE recruits were retained at the 6 weeks' timepoint and there was no difference in retention rate between the information groups: MMI (473; 99.6%); PIS (481; 99.4%). CONCLUSIONS MMI did not increase recruitment or retention in the FORCE trial, but participants rated multimedia as easier to understand and were more likely to evaluate it positively. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN73136092 and ISRCTN13955395.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Peter Knapp
- Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK
| | | | | | - Louise Spoors
- NDORMS, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Jenny Roche
- Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Donovan JL, Jepson M, Rooshenas L, Paramasivan S, Mills N, Elliott D, Wade J, Reda D, Blazeby JM, Moghanaki D, Hwang ES, Davies L. Development of a new adapted QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI-Two) for rapid application to RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls—to identify previously hidden barriers and improve recruitment. Trials 2022; 23:258. [PMID: 35379301 PMCID: PMC8978173 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06187-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2021] [Accepted: 03/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) struggle to recruit, despite valiant efforts. The QRI (QuinteT Recruitment Intervention) uses innovative research methods to optimise recruitment by revealing previously hidden barriers related to the perceptions and experiences of recruiters and patients, and targeting remedial actions. It was designed to be integrated with RCTs anticipating difficulties at the outset. A new version of the intervention (QRI-Two) was developed for RCTs already underway with enrolment shortfalls. Methods QRIs in 12 RCTs with enrolment shortfalls during 2007–2017 were reviewed to document which of the research methods used could be rapidly applied to successfully identify recruitment barriers. These methods were then included in the new streamlined QRI-Two intervention which was applied in 20 RCTs in the USA and Europe during 2018–2019. The feasibility of the QRI-Two was investigated, recruitment barriers and proposed remedial actions were documented, and the QRI-Two protocol was finalised. Results The review of QRIs from 2007 to 2017 showed that previously unrecognised recruitment barriers could be identified but data collection for the full QRI required time and resources usually unavailable to ongoing RCTs. The streamlined QRI-Two focussed on analysis of screening/accrual data and RCT documents (protocol, patient-information), with discussion of newly diagnosed barriers and potential remedial actions in a workshop with the RCT team. Four RCTs confirmed the feasibility of the rapid application of the QRI-Two. When the QRI-Two was applied to 14 RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls, an array of previously unknown/underestimated recruitment barriers related to issues such as equipoise, intervention preferences, or study presentation was identified, with new insights into losses of eligible patients along the recruitment pathway. The QRI-Two workshop enabled discussion of the newly diagnosed barriers and potential remedial actions to improve recruitment in collaboration with the RCT team. As expected, the QRI-Two performed less well in six RCTs at the start-up stage before commencing enrolment. Conclusions The QRI-Two can be applied rapidly, diagnose previously unrecognised recruitment barriers, and suggest remedial actions in RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls, providing opportunities for RCT teams to develop targeted actions to improve recruitment. The effectiveness of the QRI-Two in improving recruitment requires further evaluation. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06187-y.
Collapse
|
10
|
Thiblin E, Woodford J, Öhman M, von Essen L. The effect of personalised versus non-personalised study invitations on recruitment within the ENGAGE feasibility trial: an embedded randomised controlled recruitment trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 2022; 22:65. [PMID: 35249543 PMCID: PMC8898447 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01553-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 02/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruitment into clinical trials is challenging and there is a lack of evidence on effective recruitment strategies. Personalisation of invitation letters is a potentially pragmatic and feasible way of increasing recruitment rates at a low-cost. However, there is a lack of evidence concerning the effect of personalising of study invitation letters on recruitment rates. METHODS We undertook a Study Within A Trial (SWAT) to investigate the effect of personalised versus non-personalised study invitation letters on recruitment rates into the host feasibility trial ENGAGE, a feasibility study of an internet-administered, guided, Low Intensity Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy based self-help intervention for parents of children previously treated for cancer. An intervention group (n = 254) received a personalised study invitation letter and the control group (n = 255) received a non-personalised study invitation letter. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants in the intervention group and the control group enrolled into the ENGAGE host feasibility trial. Secondary outcomes relating to the recruitment and screening process, and retention were examined. Differences in proportions between groups for the primary and secondary outcomes were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS Of the 509 potential participants, 56 (11.0%) were enrolled into the ENGAGE host feasibility trial: personalised: 30/254 (11.8%) and non-personalised: 26/255 (10.2%). No statistically significant effect on personalisation of enrolment was found (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.68-2.06). No statistically significant differences were found for any secondary outcome. CONCLUSIONS Personalisation of study invitations had no effect on recruitment. However, given the small study sample size in the present SWAT, and lack of similar embedded recruitment RCTs to enable a meta-analysis, additional SWATs to examine the personalisation of study invitation letters are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN57233429 ; ISRCTN18404129 ; SWAT 112, Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT repository (2018 OCT 1 1231) ( https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/TheNorthernIrelandNetworkforTrialsMethodologyResearch/FileStore/Filetoupload,939618,en.pdf ).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ella Thiblin
- Healthcare Sciences and e-Health, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 14B, 751 05, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Joanne Woodford
- Healthcare Sciences and e-Health, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 14B, 751 05, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Mattias Öhman
- Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Louise von Essen
- Healthcare Sciences and e-Health, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 14B, 751 05, Uppsala, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Coleman E, Arundel C, Clark L, Doherty L, Gillies K, Hewitt C, Innes K, Parker A, Torgerson D, Treweek S. Bah humbug! Association between sending Christmas cards to trial participants and trial retention: randomised study within a trial conducted simultaneously across eight host trials. BMJ 2021; 375:e067742. [PMID: 34906985 PMCID: PMC8669570 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-067742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of sending Christmas cards to participants in randomised controlled trials to increase retention rate at follow-ups, and to explore the feasibility of doing a study within a trial (SWAT) across multiple host trials simultaneously. DESIGN Randomised SWAT conducted simultaneously across eight host trials. SETTING Eight randomised controlled trials researching various areas including surgery and smoking cessation. PARTICIPANTS 3223 trial participants who were still due at least one follow-up from their host randomised controlled trial. INTERVENTION Participants were randomised (1:1, separately by each host trial) to either received a Christmas card in mid-December 2019 or to not receive a card. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Proportion of participants completing their next follow-up (retention rate) within their host randomised controlled trial. RESULTS 1469 participants (age 16-94 years; 70% (n=1033) female; 96% (813/847) white ethnicity) across the eight host randomised controlled trials were involved in the analysis (cut short owing to covid-19). No evidence was found of a difference in retention rate between the two arms for any of the host trials when analysed separately or when the results were combined (85.3% (639/749) for cards versus 85.4% (615/720) for no card; odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.29; P=0.77). No difference was observed when comparing just participants who were due a follow-up in the 30 days after receiving the card (odds ratio 0.96, 0.42 to 2.21). No evidence of a difference in time to complete the questionnaire was found (hazard ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.13; P=0.80). These results were robust to post hoc sensitivity analyses. The cost of this intervention was £0.76 (€0.91; $1.02) per participant, and it will have a carbon footprint of approximately 140 g CO2 equivalent per card. One benefit of this approach was the need to only submit one ethics application. CONCLUSIONS Sending Christmas cards to participants in randomised controlled trials does not increase retention. Undertaking a SWAT within multiple randomised controlled trials at the same time is, however, possible. This approach should be used more often to build an evidence base to support selection of recruitment and retention strategies. Although no evidence of a boost to retention was found, embedding a SWAT in multiple host trials simultaneously has been shown to be possible. STUDY REGISTRATION SWAT repository https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/TheNorthernIrelandNetworkforTrialsMethodologyResearch/FileStore/Filetoupload,846275,en.pdf#search=SWAT%2082.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Coleman
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Catherine Arundel
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Laura Clark
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Laura Doherty
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Catherine Hewitt
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Karen Innes
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Adwoa Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - David Torgerson
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jake-Schoffman DE, Brown SD, Baiocchi M, Bibeau JL, Daubenmier J, Ferrara A, Galarce MN, Hartogensis W, Hecht FM, Hedderson MM, Moran PJ, Pagoto SL, Tsai AL, Waring ME, Kiernan M. Methods-Motivational Interviewing Approach for Enhanced Retention and Attendance. Am J Prev Med 2021; 61:606-617. [PMID: 34544560 PMCID: PMC9302384 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2021] [Revised: 03/15/2021] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Suboptimal and differential participant engagement in randomized trials-including retention at primary outcome assessments and attendance at intervention sessions-undermines rigor, internal validity, and trial conclusions. METHODS First, this study describes Methods-Motivational Interviewing approach and strategies for implementation. This approach engages potential participants before randomization through interactive, prerequisite orientation sessions that illustrate the scientific rationale behind trial methods in accessible language and use motivational interviewing to diffuse ambivalence about participation. Then, this study examines the potential improvements in retention (proportion of participants assessed at follow-up visits) and attendance (e.g., mean percentage of intervention sessions attended, percentage of participants who attended 0 sessions) in 3 randomized weight-management trials that quickly added prerequisite orientations to their protocols following early signs of suboptimal or differential participant engagement (Supporting Health by Integrating Nutrition and Exercise [2009-2013, n=194]; Get Social [2016-2020, n=217]; GestationaL Weight Gain and Optimal Wellness [2014-2018, n=389]). Using a pre-post analytical design, adjusted estimates from regression models controlling for condition and assessment timepoint (analyses from 2020) are reported. RESULTS After adding prerequisite orientations, all 3 trials attained higher participant engagement. Retention at assessments was 11.4% and 17.3% higher (Get Social and Supporting Health by Integrating Nutrition and Exercise, respectively). Mean percentage of attendance at intervention sessions was 8.8% higher (GestationaL Weight Gain and Optimal Wellness), and 10.1% fewer participants attended 0 intervention sessions (Get Social). Descriptively, all the remaining retention and attendance outcomes were consistently higher but were nonsignificant. Across the trials, adding prerequisite orientations did not impact the proportion of eligible participants enrolled or the baseline demographics. CONCLUSIONS The Methods-Motivational Interviewing approach shows promise for increasing the rigor of randomized trials and is readily adaptable to in-person, webinar, and conference call formats. TRIAL REGISTRATION All 3 trials are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Supporting Health by Integrating Nutrition and Exercise: NCT00960414; Get Social: NCT02646618; and GestationaL Weight Gain and Optimal Wellness: NCT02130232).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle E Jake-Schoffman
- Department of Health Education & Behavior, College of Health and Human Performance, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
| | - Susan D Brown
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California
| | - Michael Baiocchi
- Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Jessica L Bibeau
- Department of Allied Health Sciences, College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
| | - Jennifer Daubenmier
- The Institute for Holistic Health Studies, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California
| | - Assiamira Ferrara
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California
| | - Maren N Galarce
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California
| | - Wendy Hartogensis
- UCSF Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Frederick M Hecht
- UCSF Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Monique M Hedderson
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California
| | - Patricia J Moran
- UCSF Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Sherry L Pagoto
- Department of Allied Health Sciences, College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
| | - Ai-Lin Tsai
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California
| | - Molly E Waring
- Department of Allied Health Sciences, College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
| | - Michaela Kiernan
- Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Madurasinghe VW, Bower P, Eldridge S, Collier D, Graffy J, Treweek S, Knapp P, Parker A, Rick J, Salisbury C, Man MS, Torgerson D, Sheridan R, Sullivan F, Cockayne S, Dack C. Can we achieve better recruitment by providing better information? Meta-analysis of 'studies within a trial' (SWATs) of optimised participant information sheets. BMC Med 2021; 19:218. [PMID: 34551765 PMCID: PMC8459527 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-02086-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2021] [Accepted: 08/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The information given to people considering taking part in a trial needs to be easy to understand if those people are to become, and then remain, trial participants. However, there is a tension between providing comprehensive information and providing information that is comprehensible. User-testing is one method of developing better participant information, and there is evidence that user-tested information is better at informing participants about key issues relating to trials. However, it is not clear if user-testing also leads to changes in the rates of recruitment in trials, compared to standard trial information. As part of a programme of research, we embedded 'studies within a trial' (SWATs) across multiple ongoing trials to see if user-tested materials led to better rates of recruitment. METHODS Seven 'host' trials included a SWAT evaluation and randomised their participants to receive routine information sheets generated by the research teams, or information sheets optimised through user-testing. We collected data on trial recruitment and analysed the results across these trials using random effects meta-analysis, with the primary outcome defined as the proportion of participants randomised in a host trial following an invitation to take part. RESULTS Six SWATs (n=27,805) provided data on recruitment. Optimised participant information sheets likely result in little or no difference in recruitment rates (7.2% versus 6.8%, pooled odds ratio = 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.19, p-value = 0.63, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS Participant information sheets developed through user testing did not improve recruitment rates. The programme of work showed that co-ordinated testing of recruitment strategies using SWATs is feasible and can provide both definitive and timely evidence on the effectiveness of recruitment strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION Healthlines Depression (ISRCTN14172341) Healthlines CVD (ISRCTN27508731) CASPER (ISRCTN02202951) ISDR (ISRCTN87561257) ECLS (NCT01925625) REFORM (ISRCTN68240461) HeLP Diabetes (ISRCTN02123133).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vichithranie W Madurasinghe
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7L, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- NIHR School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Clinical Trials and Methodology, Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| | - David Collier
- Barts NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Jonathan Graffy
- Arbury Road Surgery 114, Arbury Road, Cambridge, CB4 2JG, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Room 306, 3rd Floor, Health Sciences Building Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York & the Hull York Medical School, York, UK
| | - Adwoa Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Jo Rick
- National Institute of Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Chris Salisbury
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK
| | - Mei See Man
- Norwich Clinical Trials Unit, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK
| | - David Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Rebecca Sheridan
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Frank Sullivan
- University of St. Andrews North Haugh, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9T, UK
| | - Sarah Cockayne
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Charlotte Dack
- Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cureton L, Marian IR, Barber VS, Parker A, Torgerson DJ, Hopewell S. Randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate personalised versus standard text message prompts for increasing trial participant response to postal questionnaires (PROMPTS). Trials 2021; 22:502. [PMID: 34321055 PMCID: PMC8320189 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05452-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Use of a person's name in a text message has been shown to be effective in instigating behaviour change. We evaluated the effectiveness of a personalised text message (including the recipient's name) versus a standardised text message for prompting a response from trial participants to complete and return postal follow-up questionnaires. METHODS Using a randomised study within a trial (SWAT) embedded within the host GRASP (Getting it Right: Addressing Shoulder Pain) trial, participants who provided a mobile telephone number were randomised (1:1) by a central computer system to receive either (1) a personalised text message which included their name or (2) a standard text message. Text messages were sent by the trial office on the same day as the 6-month GRASP follow-up questionnaire. The primary outcome was questionnaire response rate, defined as the proportion of 6-month GRASP follow-up questionnaires returned by participants. Secondary outcomes included time to response, the proportion of participants sent a reminder follow-up questionnaire, and cost. RESULTS Between March 2017 and May 2019 (recruitment period for GRASP trial), 618 participants were randomised to a personalised (n = 309) or standard (n = 309) text message and all were included in the analysis. The overall questionnaire response rate was 87% (n = 537/618); 90% (n = 277/309) of participants responded in the personalised text message group compared to 84% (n = 260/309) in the standard text message group (relative risk (RR) 1.07; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13). Participants randomised to receive the personalised text message were more likely to return their initial postal questionnaire than those who received the standard text message (n = 185/309; 60% vs. n = 160/309; 52%) (RR 1.16; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.33); this represents an absolute percentage difference between intervention groups of 8%. Post hoc subgroup analysis showed that males under 65 years were the group most likely to return their initial questionnaire if they received a personalised text message. CONCLUSION Overall, participants who received a personalised text message were more likely to return their questionnaire than those who received the standard text message. TRIAL REGISTRATION GRASP Trial ISRCTN16539266 ; SWAT Repository ID 35.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Cureton
- Centre for Rehabilitation Research in Oxford, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ioana R Marian
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit/Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Building, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK
| | - Vicki S Barber
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit/Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Building, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK
| | | | | | - Sally Hopewell
- Centre for Rehabilitation Research in Oxford, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit/Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Building, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Knapp P, Mandall N, Hulse W, Roche J, Moe-Byrne T, Martin-Kerry J, Sheridan R, Higgins S. Evaluating the use of multimedia information when recruiting adolescents to orthodontics research: A randomised controlled trial. J Orthod 2021; 48:343-351. [PMID: 34227411 PMCID: PMC8652365 DOI: 10.1177/14653125211024250] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Objective: To compare two methods of providing information about the Bone Anchored Maxillary Protraction (BAMP) trial: standard printed information and multimedia websites, for their quality and ease of understanding, and impact on decision-making. Design: Randomised controlled trial. Setting: Orthodontic outpatient clinic in the UK. Methods: Participants were 109 adolescents (aged 11–14 years) attending for orthodontic treatment. While awaiting treatment they were asked to imagine being recruited to the BAMP clinical trial. They were individually randomised to receive the printed or the multimedia website information (comprising text, animations and ‘talking head’ videos). After reading or viewing the information, they completed a 9-item Likert scale Decision-Making Questionnaire (DMQ) (score range 0–36) plus three free-text questions on their evaluation of the information. Results: A total of 104 participants completed the questionnaire. Mean total DMQ scores were higher (more positive) in the website group (28.1 vs. 27.0), although the difference was small and not statistically significant (P = 0.20). Analysis of individual questionnaire items showed two statistically significant differences: the website information had higher ratings on ‘easy to understand’ (Z = 3.03; P = 0.003) and ‘confidence in decision-making’ (Z = 2.00; P = 0.044). On the three free-text questions, more positive and fewer negative comments were made about the websites than the printed information. Conclusion: In this hypothetical trial setting, adolescent patients found that trial information conveyed on a multimedia website was easier to understand and made them more confident in their decision about trial participation. Their subjective evaluations of the website were also more positive and less negative than about the printed information. Multimedia information has the potential to increase the quality of engagement and information exchange when seeking consent for research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences & the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK
| | - Nicky Mandall
- Tameside General Hospital, Ashton-under-Lyne, Tameside, UK
| | - Wendy Hulse
- Tameside General Hospital, Ashton-under-Lyne, Tameside, UK
| | - Jenny Roche
- Department of Health Sciences & the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK.,Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Thirimon Moe-Byrne
- Department of Health Sciences & the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK.,Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Jacqueline Martin-Kerry
- Department of Health Sciences & the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK.,Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Rebecca Sheridan
- Department of Health Sciences & the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK.,Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Brehaut JC, Carroll K, Presseau J, Richards DP, Gordon J, Bénard A, Hudek N, Graham ID, Fergusson DA, Marlin S. A patient-focused, theory-guided approach to survey design identified barriers to and drivers of clinical trial participation. J Clin Epidemiol 2020; 132:106-115. [PMID: 33338563 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Despite clear evidence showing that many clinical trials fail or are delayed because of poor patient recruitment, there is surprisingly little empirically supported guidance for trialists seeking to optimize their trial recruitment strategies. We propose that the challenges of recruitment can be better understood and addressed by thinking of research participation as one or more behaviors, subject to the same forces as other human behaviors. In this article, we describe an adaptable, behavioral theory-driven approach for designing pretrial surveys of the barriers and drivers relevant to trial participation. Instead of proposing a single survey instrument intended to be used uniformly across many situations, we propose that tailored surveys be informed by a common comprehensive, theory-guided development approach that ensures all domains potentially guiding participation are considered. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which organizes over 100 constructs known to be associated with behavior and behavior change into 14 domains that describe determinants of professional and patient health behaviors, to inform the development of tailored surveys about barriers to and drivers of clinical trial participation. After searching the literature for barriers and drivers to trial recruitment relevant to each of the TDF domains, we developed separate surveys for members of two national health charities (Canadian Breast Cancer Network, Huntington Society of Canada) to exemplify how the approach can be adapted across settings. We conducted think-aloud interviews with members of each group to maximize the clarity and usability of the surveys, elicited opinions about which barriers/drivers were relevant for each patient group, and identified additional barriers/drivers. Interviews proceeded iteratively with changes incorporated into subsequent interviews. Here, we describe our two target patient groups, as well as our process of modifying, adding, and deleting barrier/driver items for each group and across theoretical domains. RESULTS We interviewed 8 women with a history of breast cancer from the Canadian Breast Cancer Network (48-65 year old) and 11 Huntington Disease community members (9 women) from the Huntington Society of Canada (26-70 year old). After the iterative development interviews, the breast cancer group had identified 38 barriers/drivers thought relevant to their participation in clinical trials across 12 TDF domains. The Huntington group identified 47 items across 13 TDF domains. CONCLUSION Our patient-focused and theory-guided approach was able to identify a more comprehensive range of barriers to and drivers of trial participation than existing published tools. Our approach is also more broadly adaptable than such tools, in that it uses a theoretical framework and in-depth piloting to generate a set of items tailored to each specific clinical area, rather than a single set of items intended to be applicable to all situations. This theory-guided approach also enables more specific recruitment strategies to be developed once domain-specific barriers are known, potentially optimizing participation for a given trial and helping build a cumulative evidence of barriers/drivers and strategies for addressing them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jamie C Brehaut
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6; Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada, K1G 5Z3.
| | - Kelly Carroll
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Justin Presseau
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6; Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada, K1G 5Z3
| | - Dawn P Richards
- Clinical Trials Ontario, 661 University Avenue, Suite 460, MaRS Centre, West Tower, Toronto, Canada M5G 1M1
| | - Jenn Gordon
- Canadian Breast Cancer Network, 331 Cooper St. Suite 602, Ottawa, Canada, K2P 0G5
| | - Angèle Bénard
- Huntington Society of Canada (HSC), 20 Erb Street West, Suite 801, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L1T2
| | - Natasha Hudek
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Ian D Graham
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6; Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada, K1G 5Z3
| | - Dean A Fergusson
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6; Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada, K1G 5Z3
| | - Susan Marlin
- Clinical Trials Ontario, 661 University Avenue, Suite 460, MaRS Centre, West Tower, Toronto, Canada M5G 1M1
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rick C, Mallett S, Brown J, Ottridge R, Palmer A, Parker V, Priest L, Deeks JJ. Test evaluation trials present different challenges for trial managers compared to intervention trials. Trials 2020; 21:987. [PMID: 33256826 PMCID: PMC7706229 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04861-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Test evaluation trials present different challenges for trial managers compared to intervention trials. There has been very little research on the management of test evaluation trials and how this impacts on trial success, in comparison with intervention trials. Evaluations of medical tests present specific challenges, because they are a pivot point bridging the complexities of pathways prompting testing with treatment decision-making. We systematically explored key differences in the trial design and management of test evaluation trials compared to intervention trials at the different stages of study design and delivery. We identified challenges in test evaluation trials that were more pronounced than in intervention trials, based on experience from 10 test evaluation trials. METHODS We formed a focus group of 7 trial managers and a statistician who had been involved in the day-to-day management of both test evaluation trials and intervention trials. We used discussion and content analysis to group challenges from 10 trials into a structured thematic format. The trials covered a range of medical conditions, diagnostic tests, clinical pathways and conditions including chronic kidney disease, chronic pelvic pain, colitis, detrusor over-activity, group B streptococcal colonisation, tuberculosis and colorectal, lung, ovarian and thyroid cancers. RESULTS We identified 10 common themes underlying challenges that are more pronounced in test evaluation compared to intervention trials. We illustrate these themes with examples from 10 trials, including with 31 specific challenges we experienced. The themes were ethics/governance; accessing patient populations; recruitment; patient preference; test processes, clinical pathways and samples storage; uncertainty of diagnostic results; verifying diagnosis (reference standard); follow-up; adverse effects; and diagnostic impact. CONCLUSION We present 10 common themes, including 31 challenges, in test evaluation trials that will be helpful to others designing and managing future test evaluation trials. Proactive identification of potential challenges at the design and planning stages of test evaluation trials will enable strategies to improve trial design and management that may be different from standard strategies used for intervention trials. Future work could extend this topic to include challenges for other trial stakeholders including participants, clinicians, statisticians and funders. TRIAL REGISTRATION All trials reviewed in this project were registered and are provided in Table 1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Rick
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit Building 42, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.
| | - Sue Mallett
- UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - James Brown
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Ryan Ottridge
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Andrew Palmer
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Victoria Parker
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Lee Priest
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jonathan J Deeks
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Test Evaluation Research Group, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Duane S, Vellinga A, Smith V, Tierney M, Beecher C, Burke M, Murphy AW, Devane D. The effectiveness of digital multimedia presentation of trial information on recruitment and retention of patients: Protocol for a study within a trial (SWAT). HRB Open Res 2020; 3:10. [PMID: 32596630 PMCID: PMC7308906 DOI: 10.12688/hrbopenres.12994.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Studies within trials (SWATs) present an opportunity to examine design factors that may impact on the successful delivery of trials. One area in need of research is trial recruitment. Recruiting patients to trials is a major challenge facing trialists. Failure to meet recruitment targets can result in delays and underpowered studies. This SWAT evaluates the effectiveness of hand-held digital multimedia presentation of trial information and standard written patient information to potential participants on recruitment and retention to a host trial. Methods: This is the protocol for SWAT 15, a two-group, embedded parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT) (ISRCTN12838042) designed within a host trial - the SATIN trial (ISRCTN88111427), a RCT designed for implementation in the Irish primary care setting. The SWAT eligibility criteria was determined by the host trial. General practices who agree to participate in the host trial will provide women (participants) who are willing to consider participating in the host trial with either a multimedia digital information resource facilitated through a handheld tablet device, plus a written participant information leaflet (Intervention) or a written participant information leaflet (comparator). Outcomes are recruitment and retention to the host SATIN trial and participant's quality of decision-making. Discussion: Although designed to be implemented in a host trial, the host trial, was suspended and therefore this SWAT was not implemented. The protocol and the lessons learnt whilst developing it offer guidance to researchers who wish to answer similar research questions in the future in a similar context or setting. Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12838042 (11/10/2017).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sinead Duane
- J.E. Cairnes School of Business & Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.,HRB Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Akke Vellinga
- Discipline of Bacteriology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.,Discipline of General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Valerie Smith
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Marie Tierney
- HRB Primary Care Clinical Trial Network Ireland, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Claire Beecher
- HRB Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Megan Burke
- HRB Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Andrew W Murphy
- Discipline of General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.,HRB Primary Care Clinical Trial Network Ireland, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Declan Devane
- HRB Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.,School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Knapp P, Gilbody S, Holt J, Keding A, Mitchell N, Raynor DK, Silcock J, Torgerson D. Optimised patient information materials and recruitment to a study of behavioural activation in older adults: an embedded study within a trial. F1000Res 2020; 9:417. [PMID: 32789011 PMCID: PMC7400690 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.24051.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/18/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Printed participant information about randomised controlled trials is often long, technical and difficult to navigate. Improving information materials is possible through optimisation and user-testing, and may impact on participant understanding and rates of recruitment. Methods: A study within a trial (SWAT) was undertaken within the CASPER trial. Potential CASPER participants were randomised to receive either the standard trial information or revised information that had been optimised through information design and user testing. Results: A total of 11,531 patients were randomised in the SWAT. Rates of recruitment to the CASPER trial were 2.0% in the optimised information group and 1.9% in the standard information group (odds ratio 1.027; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.33; p=0.202). Conclusions: Participant information that had been optimised through information design and user testing did not result in any change to rate of recruitment to the host trial. Registration: ISRCTN ID ISRCTN02202951; registered on 3 June 2009.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York,, York, UK
| | - Simon Gilbody
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York,, York, UK
| | - Janet Holt
- School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ada Keding
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York,, York, UK
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Natasha Mitchell
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York,, York, UK
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | - Jonathan Silcock
- School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK
| | - David Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York,, York, UK
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Woodford J, Norbäck K, Hagström J, Grönqvist H, Parker A, Arundel C, von Essen L. Study within a trial (SWAT) protocol. Investigating the effect of personalised versus non-personalised study invitations on recruitment: An embedded randomised controlled recruitment trial. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2020; 18:100572. [PMID: 32420511 PMCID: PMC7214762 DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2019] [Revised: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 04/19/2020] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Recruitment into clinical trials is a common challenge experienced by healthcare researchers. Currently, there is little evidence regarding strategies to improve recruitment into clinical trials. However, preliminary research suggests the personalisation of study invitation letters may increase recruitment rates. As such, there is a need to investigate the effectiveness of personalisation strategies on trial recruitment rates. This study within a trial (SWAT) will investigate the effect of personalised versus non-personalised study invitation letters on recruitment rates into the host trial ENGAGE, a feasibility study of an internet-administered, guided, Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) based self-help intervention for parents of children previously treated for cancer. Methods An embedded randomised controlled trial (RCT) will investigate the effectiveness of a personalised study invitation letter including the potential participant’s name and address compared with a standard, non-personalised letter without name or address, on participant recruitment rates into the ENGAGE study. The primary outcome is differences in the proportion of participants recruited, examined using logistic regression. Results will be reported as adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Discussion Even moderate effects of the personalisation of study invitation letters on recruitment rates could be of significant value by shortening study length, saving resources, and providing a faster answer to the clinical question posed by the study. This protocol can be used as a template for other researchers who wish to contribute to the evidence base for trial decision-making, by embedding a similar SWAT into their trial. Trial registration ISRCTN 57233429; ISRCTN 18404129; SWAT 112, Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT repository (2018 OCT 1 1231).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanne Woodford
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University Psychosocial Care Programme (U-CARE), Uppsala University, Sweden
| | - Kajsa Norbäck
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University Psychosocial Care Programme (U-CARE), Uppsala University, Sweden
| | - Josefin Hagström
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University Psychosocial Care Programme (U-CARE), Uppsala University, Sweden
| | - Helena Grönqvist
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University Psychosocial Care Programme (U-CARE), Uppsala University, Sweden
| | - Adwoa Parker
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, United Kingdom
| | - Catherine Arundel
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, United Kingdom
| | - Louise von Essen
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University Psychosocial Care Programme (U-CARE), Uppsala University, Sweden
- Corresponding author. Uppsala University, Clinical Psychology in Healthcare, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Box 572, 751 23, Uppsala, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Gardner HR, Albarquoni L, El Feky A, Gillies K, Treweek S. A systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials. F1000Res 2020; 9:86. [PMID: 32685133 PMCID: PMC7336048 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.22182.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Recruitment to trials can be challenging. Currently, non-randomised evaluations of trial recruitment interventions are rejected due to poor methodological quality, but systematic assessment of this substantial body of work may inform trialists' decision-making about recruitment methods. Our objective was to quantify the effects of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised trials evaluated using non-randomised study designs. Methods: We searched relevant databases for non-randomised studies that included two or more interventions evaluating recruitment to trials. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full texts for eligible studies, then extracted data on: recruitment intervention, setting, participant characteristics, number of participants in intervention and comparator groups. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias. The primary outcome was the number of recruits to a trial. Results: We identified 92 studies for inclusion; 90 studies aimed to improve the recruitment of participants, one aimed to improve the recruitment of GP practices, and one aimed to improve recruitment of GPs. Of the 92 included studies, 20 were at high risk of bias due to confounding; the remaining 72 were at high risk of bias due to confounding and at least one other category of the ROBINS-I tool. The 20 studies at least risk of bias were synthesised narratively based on seven broad categories; Face to face recruitment initiatives, postal invitations and responses, language adaptations, randomisation methods, trial awareness strategies aimed at the recruitee, trial awareness strategies aimed at the recruiter, and use of networks and databases. The utility of included studies is substantially limited due to small sample sizes, inadequate reporting, and a lack of coordination around deciding what to evaluate and how. Conclusions: Careful thought around planning, conduct, and reporting of non-randomised evaluations of recruitment interventions is required to prevent future non-randomised studies contributing to research waste. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42016037718.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heidi R Gardner
- Health Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, AB25 2ZD, UK
| | - Loai Albarquoni
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
| | - Adel El Feky
- Health Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, AB25 2ZD, UK
| | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, AB25 2ZD, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, AB25 2ZD, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Parkinson B, Meacock R, Sutton M, Fichera E, Mills N, Shorter GW, Treweek S, Harman NL, Brown RCH, Gillies K, Bower P. Designing and using incentives to support recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a scoping review and a checklist for design. Trials 2019; 20:624. [PMID: 31706324 PMCID: PMC6842495 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3710-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2018] [Accepted: 09/09/2019] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Recruitment and retention of participants are both critical for the success of trials, yet both remain significant problems. The use of incentives to target participants and trial staff has been proposed as one solution. The effects of incentives are complex and depend upon how they are designed, but these complexities are often overlooked. In this paper, we used a scoping review to ‘map’ the literature, with two aims: to develop a checklist on the design and use of incentives to support recruitment and retention in trials; and to identify key research topics for the future. Methods The scoping review drew on the existing economic theory of incentives and a structured review of the literature on the use of incentives in three healthcare settings: trials, pay for performance, and health behaviour change. We identified the design issues that need to be considered when introducing an incentive scheme to improve recruitment and retention in trials. We then reviewed both the theoretical and empirical evidence relating to each of these design issues. We synthesised the findings into a checklist to guide the design of interventions using incentives. Results The issues to consider when designing an incentive system were summarised into an eight-question checklist. The checklist covers: the current incentives and barriers operating in the system; who the incentive should be directed towards; what the incentive should be linked to; the form of incentive; the incentive size; the structure of the incentive system; the timing and frequency of incentive payouts; and the potential unintended consequences. We concluded the section on each design aspect by highlighting the gaps in the current evidence base. Conclusions Our findings highlight how complex the design of incentive systems can be, and how crucial each design choice is to overall effectiveness. The most appropriate design choice will differ according to context, and we have aimed to provide context-specific advice. Whilst all design issues warrant further research, evidence is most needed on incentives directed at recruiters, optimal incentive size, and testing of different incentive structures, particularly exploring repeat arrangements with recruiters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beth Parkinson
- Health Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE), University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Rachel Meacock
- Health Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE), University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Matt Sutton
- Health Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE), University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Nicola Mills
- MRC ConDuCT-II Hub, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Gillian W Shorter
- Institute of Mental Health Sciences, School of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Nicola L Harman
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Biggs K, Hind D, Bradburn M, Swaby L, Brown S. Design, planning and implementation lessons learnt from a surgical multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Trials 2019; 20:620. [PMID: 31675992 PMCID: PMC6823948 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3649-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2018] [Accepted: 08/12/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Increasingly, pragmatic randomised controlled trials are being used to evaluate surgical interventions, although they present particular difficulties in regards to recruitment and retention. Methods Procedures and processes related to implementation of a multi-centre pragmatic surgical randomised controlled trial are discussed. In this surgical trial, forecasting of consent rates based on similar trials and micro-costing of study activities with research partners were undertaken and a video was produced targeting recruiting staff with the aim of aiding recruitment. The baseline assessments were reviewed to ensure the timing did not impact on the outcome. Attrition due to procedure waiting time was monitored and data were triangulated for the primary outcome to ensure adequate follow-up data. Results Forecasting and costing ensured that the recruitment window was of adequate length and adequate resource was available for study procedures at multiple clinics in each hospital. Recruiting staff found the recruitment video useful. The comparison of patient-reported data collected prior to randomisation and prior to treatment provided confidence in the baseline data. Knowledge of participant dropout due to delays in treatment meant we were able to increase the recruitment target in a timely fashion, and along with the triangulation of data sources, this ensured adequate follow-up of randomised participants. Conclusions This paper provides a range of evidence-based and experience-based approaches which, collectively, resulted in meeting our study objectives and from which lessons may be transferable. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN41394716. Registered on 10 May 2012. UKCRN Study ID: 12486.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Biggs
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
| | - Daniel Hind
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - Mike Bradburn
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - Lizzie Swaby
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - Steve Brown
- Department of Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Northern General Hospital, Herries Road, Sheffield, S5 7AU, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Jolly K, Sidhu M, Bower P, Madurasinghe V. Improving recruitment to a study of telehealth management for COPD: a cluster randomised controlled 'study within a trial' (SWAT) of a multimedia information resource. Trials 2019; 20:453. [PMID: 31340853 PMCID: PMC6657092 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3496-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2019] [Accepted: 06/05/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Good quality information is critical for valid informed consent to trials, but current paper-based consent procedures are potentially unwieldy and can be difficult to comprehend, which may deter people from participating. Multimedia resources may be able to provide more accessible and user-friendly information. We aimed to test whether offering access to a multimedia information resource alongside standard, printed patient information impacted on recruitment rates by conducting a pragmatic 'study within a trial' (SWAT) embedding a trial of a multimedia resource within an existing trial. METHODS The PSM COPD study involved people with mild symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recruited from primary care being randomised to a nurse-delivered telephone health coaching intervention, or usual primary care. For the SWAT of recruitment procedures, practices recruiting participants were cluster randomised to use either the standard printed patient information materials or standard printed patient information materials with access to a multimedia information resource. The multimedia resource was developed by patient and public involvement (PPI) contributors and researchers, and included study-specific information (e.g. study purpose, risks), and generic information about trials (e.g. confidentiality, randomisation). We developed a list of components and used animations as well as video clips of patients discussing their experiences of participation, matched to these components. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants randomised. RESULTS Nine point six percent of those receiving standard printed patient information materials and access to the multimedia information resource were recruited, compared to 10.8% in those receiving standard printed materials alone (odds ratio (OR) = 0.844, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.22). We also found no effects on the proportion of people responding to the invitation (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.33) or retention in the trial at 6 (ORs 0.84, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.22) and 12 months after randomisation (ORs 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.18), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The study suggests no benefits of access to a multimedia information resource alongside patient information materials on recruitment. This may reflect the limited engagement of patients with the multimedia resource. Further uses of multimedia resources will need to explore how content can be explicitly matched to user needs and preferences and methods to encourage engagement to see if effects can be enhanced. More SWATs of multimedia into ongoing trials will provide a more precise estimate of effect, and explore further how effects vary by trial context and recruitment process, intervention, and patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current controlled trials ISRCTN 06710391 . Registered on 21 November 2013. SWAT REGISTRATION SWAT 23: Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (MRC START). Registered on 11 January 2012.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Jolly
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Manbinder Sidhu
- Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
| | | | - Peter Bower
- NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| | - Vichithranie Madurasinghe
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute Yvonne Carter Building, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Beasant L, Brigden A, Parslow R, Apperley H, Keep T, Northam A, Wray C, King H, Langdon R, Mills N, Young B, Crawley E. Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2019; 14:100335. [PMID: 30949611 PMCID: PMC6430075 DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2018] [Revised: 01/25/2019] [Accepted: 02/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruitment to pediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be a challenge, with ethical issues surrounding assent and consent. Pediatric RCTs frequently recruit from a smaller pool of patients making adequate recruitment difficult. One factor which influences recruitment and retention in pediatric trials is patient and parent preferences for treatment. PURPOSE To systematically review pediatric RCTs reporting treatment preference. METHODS Database searches included: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and COCHRANE.Qualitative or quantitative papers were eligible if they reported: pediatric population, (0-17 years) recruited to an RCT and reported treatment preference for all or some of the participants/parents in any clinical area. Data extraction included: Number of eligible participants consenting to randomisation arms, number of eligible patients not randomised because of treatment preference, and any further information reported on preferences (e.g., if parent preference was different from child). RESULTS Fifty-two studies were included. The number of eligible families declining participation in an RCT because of preference for treatment varied widely (between 2 and 70%) in feasibility, conventional and preference trial designs. Some families consented to trial involvement despite having preferences for a specific treatment. Data relating to 'participant flow and recruitment' was not always reported consistently, therefore numbers who were lost to follow-up or withdrew due to preference could not be extracted. CONCLUSIONS Families often have treatment preferences which may affect trial recruitment. Whilst children appear to hold treatment preferences, this is rarely reported. Further investigation is needed to understand the reasons for preference and the impact preference has on RCT recruitment, retention and outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L. Beasant
- Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - A. Brigden
- Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - R.M. Parslow
- Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - H. Apperley
- Department of Academic Paediatrics, Royal Alexandra Children's Hospital, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals, UK
| | - T. Keep
- NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, UK
| | - A. Northam
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, UK
| | - C. Wray
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - H. King
- Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Trust, UK
| | - R. Langdon
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - N. Mills
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - B. Young
- Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, UK
| | - E. Crawley
- Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Martin-Kerry J, Parker A, Bower P, Watt I, Treweek S, Torgerson D, Arundel C, Knapp P. SWATted away: the challenging experience of setting up a programme of SWATs in paediatric trials. Trials 2019; 20:141. [PMID: 30782209 PMCID: PMC6381684 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3236-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2018] [Accepted: 01/31/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Randomised controlled trials are considered the best method for determining the effectiveness and safety of health interventions. Trials involving children are essential to ensure that treatments are safe and effective. However, many trials, in both adult and paediatric populations, do not achieve recruitment targets and/or maintain retention of participants, which can lead to a reduction in the internal and external validity of the results. Identifying ways of improving trial efficiency are important in order to increase the successful completion of trials. MAIN BODY A 'Study Within A Trial' (SWAT) is a self-contained study embedded within an ongoing trial, which aims to establish evidence to improve the management and delivery of trials in healthcare. Increasing numbers of SWATs have been undertaken in recent years yet very few within paediatric trials. Herein, we describe some of the challenges with undertaking a programme of SWATs within paediatric clinical trials in the UK. The TRECA (TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents) study involves developing multimedia websites for use within paediatric trials to provide recruitment information to children, young people and their families about the clinical trial. Challenges encountered included governance issues such as host trial approval processes and sharing of anonymised data, funding issues for host trials, internet quality and accessibility within the healthcare setting, and ethical concerns associated with SWAT methodology. We believe the ethical concerns are more pronounced in the paediatric setting, perhaps because of the fewer SWATs undertaken in these settings or that a more cautious, risk-averse approach to undertaking research with children is taken. CONCLUSION SWATs are becoming increasingly common to provide an evidence base for methods to improve trial efficiency. However, we encountered a number of unanticipated challenges to embedding TRECA that have not been previously reported within the scientific literature. We believe that, if these issues were addressed through wider promotion and explanation of undertaking SWATs involving all key stakeholders, as well as by exploration of alternative funding models for SWATs, this would enable more streamlined, appropriate and timely processes for SWATs and a stronger evidence base for what works to increase trial efficiency. TRIAL REGISTRATION The TRECA study is registered on ISRCTN, ID 73136092 . Registered on 24 August 2016.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Adwoa Parker
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Peter Bower
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Ian Watt
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD UK
| | - David Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Catherine Arundel
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Rooshenas L, Scott LJ, Blazeby JM, Rogers CA, Tilling KM, Husbands S, Conefrey C, Mills N, Stein RC, Metcalfe C, Carr AJ, Beard DJ, Davis T, Paramasivan S, Jepson M, Avery K, Elliott D, Wilson C, Donovan JL. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention supported five randomized trials to recruit to target: a mixed-methods evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol 2019; 106:108-120. [PMID: 30339938 PMCID: PMC6355457 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Revised: 09/28/2018] [Accepted: 10/10/2018] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of the QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) on recruitment in challenging randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have applied the intervention. The QRI aims to understand recruitment difficulties and then implements "QRI actions" to address these as recruitment proceeds. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING A mixed-methods study, comprising (1) before-and-after comparisons of recruitment rates and the numbers of patients approached and (2) qualitative case studies, including documentary analysis and interviews with RCT investigators. RESULTS Five UK-based publicly funded RCTs were included in the evaluation. All recruited to target. Randomized controlled trial 2 and RCT 5 both received up-front prerecruitment training before the intervention was applied. Randomized controlled trial 2 did not encounter recruitment issues and recruited above target from its outset. Recruitment difficulties, particularly communication issues, were identified and addressed through QRI actions in RCTs 1, 3, 4, and 5. Randomization rates significantly improved after QRI action in RCTs 1, 3, and 4. Quintet Recruitment Intervention actions addressed issues with approaching eligible patients in RCTs 3 and 5, which both saw significant increases in the number of patients approached. Trial investigators reported that the QRI had unearthed issues they had been unaware of and reportedly changed their practices after QRI action. CONCLUSION There is promising evidence to suggest that the QRI can support recruitment to difficult RCTs. This needs to be substantiated with future controlled evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leila Rooshenas
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom.
| | - Lauren J Scott
- NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Jane M Blazeby
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Chris A Rogers
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom; Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, Bristol Royal Infirmary, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Kate M Tilling
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Samantha Husbands
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Carmel Conefrey
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Nicola Mills
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Robert C Stein
- University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BMC), University College London Hospitals, 1st Floor Central, 250 Euston Road, London NW1 2PG, UK
| | - Chris Metcalfe
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew J Carr
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - David J Beard
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Royal College of Surgeons Surgical Intervention Trials Unit (SITU), University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Tim Davis
- Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Derby Road, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
| | - Sangeetha Paramasivan
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Marcus Jepson
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Kerry Avery
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Daisy Elliott
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Caroline Wilson
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Jenny L Donovan
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, Bristol, United Kingdom; NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Witham MD, Band MM, Price RJG, Fulton RL, Clarke CL, Donnan PT, Soiza RL, Cvoro V. Effect of two different participant information sheets on recruitment to a falls trial: An embedded randomised recruitment trial. Clin Trials 2018; 15:551-556. [PMID: 30260246 DOI: 10.1177/1740774518803558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS Recruitment to trials of intervention for older people who fall is challenging. Evidence suggests that the word falls has negative connotations for older people, and this may present a barrier to engaging with trials in this area. We therefore tested whether a participant information sheet that minimised reference to falls could improve recruitment rates. METHODS We conducted a study within a trial, embedded within a randomised controlled trial of vitamin K versus placebo to improve postural sway in patients aged 65 and over with a history of falls. Potential participants were identified from primary care lists in 14 practices and were randomised to receive either a standard participant information sheet or an information sheet minimising use of the word falls, instead focussing on maintenance of health, fitness and balance. The primary outcome for this embedded trial was the proportion of responses expressing interest in participating received in each arm. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of those contacted attending a screening visit, consenting at screening, and the proportion contacted who were randomised into the main trial. RESULTS In all, 4145 invitations were sent, with an overall response rate of 444 (10.7%). In all, 2148 individuals received the new information sheet (minimising reference to falls); 1997 received the standard information sheet. There was no statistically significant difference in response rate between those individuals sent the new information sheet and those sent the standard information sheet (10.1% vs 11.4%; difference 1.3% (95% confidence interval -0.6% to 3.2%); p = 0.19). Similarly, we found no statistically significant difference between the percentage of those who attended and consented at screening in the two groups (2.1% vs 2.7%; difference 0.6% (95% confidence interval: -0.4% to 1.6%); p = 0.20), and no statistically significant difference between the percentage randomised in the two groups (2.0% vs 2.6%; difference 0.6% (95% confidence interval -0.4% to 1.6%); p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS Use of a participant information sheet minimising reference to falls did not lead to a greater response rate in this trial targeting older people with a history of falls.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miles D Witham
- 1 Tayside Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.,2 Ageing and Health, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK
| | - Margaret M Band
- 1 Tayside Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | | | - Roberta L Fulton
- 3 School of Social and Health Sciences, Abertay University, Dundee, UK
| | - Clare L Clarke
- 1 Tayside Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | - Peter T Donnan
- 1 Tayside Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | - Roy L Soiza
- 4 Ageing Clinical and Experimental Research, School of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Parker A, Knapp P, Treweek S, Madhurasinghe V, Littleford R, Gallant S, Sullivan F, Schembri S, Rick J, Graffy J, Collier DJ, Eldridge S, Kennedy A, Bower P. The effect of optimised patient information materials on recruitment in a lung cancer screening trial: an embedded randomised recruitment trial. Trials 2018; 19:503. [PMID: 30227890 PMCID: PMC6145341 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-018-2896-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2018] [Accepted: 08/31/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Written participant information materials are important for ensuring that potential trial participants receive necessary information so that they can provide informed consent. However, such materials are frequently long and complex, which may negatively impact patient understanding and willingness to participate. Improving readability, ease of comprehension and presentation may assist with improved participant recruitment. The Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (MRC START) study aimed to develop and evaluate interventions to improve trial recruitment. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of an optimised participant information brochure and cover letter developed by MRC START regarding response and participant recruitment rates. METHODS We conducted a study within a trial (SWAT) embedded in the EarlyCDT Lung Cancer Scotland (ECLS) trial that aimed to assess the effectiveness of a new test in reducing the incidence of patients with late-stage lung cancer at diagnosis compared with standard care. Potential participants approached for ECLS were randomised to receive the original participant information brochure and accompanying letter (control group) or optimised versions of these materials which had undergone user testing and a process of re-writing, re-organisation and professional graphic design (intervention group). The primary outcome was the number of patients recruited to ECLS. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients expressing an interest in participating in ECLS. RESULTS In total, 2262 patients were randomised, 1136 of whom were sent the intervention materials and 1126 of whom were sent the control materials. The proportion of patients enrolled and randomised into ECLS was 180 of 1136 (15.8%) in the intervention group and 176 of 1126 (15.6%) in the control group (OR = 1.016, 95% CI, 0.660 to 1.564). The proportion of patients who positively responded to the invitation was 224 of 1136 (19.7%) in the intervention group and 205 of 1126 (18.2%) in the control group (OR = 1.103, 95% CI, 0.778 to 1.565). CONCLUSIONS Optimised patient information materials made little difference to the proportion of patients positively responding to a trial invitation or to the proportion subsequently randomised to the host trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01925625 . Registered on 15 August 2015. Study Within A Trial, SWAT-23. Registered on 12 April 2016.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adwoa Parker
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, 3rd Floor, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD UK
| | - Vichithranie Madhurasinghe
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, 4 Newark Street, London, E1 2AT UK
| | | | - Stephanie Gallant
- Centre for Public Health Nutrition Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | - Frank Sullivan
- School of Medicine, Medical & Biological Sciences, North Haugh, St Andrews, UK
| | - Stuart Schembri
- School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY Scotland, UK
| | - Jo Rick
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PT UK
| | - Jonathan Graffy
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 OSR UK
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, 39 Whitely Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS UK
| | - David J. Collier
- William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and the London Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, 4 Newark Street, London, E1 2AT UK
| | - Anne Kennedy
- NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Wessex, Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ UK
| | - Peter Bower
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PT UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Doing trials within trials: a qualitative study of stakeholder views on barriers and facilitators to the routine adoption of methodology research in clinical trials. Trials 2018; 19:481. [PMID: 30201022 PMCID: PMC6131831 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-018-2862-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2017] [Accepted: 08/17/2018] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Randomised controlled trials are the cornerstone of evidence-based health care, yet many trials struggle with recruitment and retention. All too often the methodologies employed to address these problems are not evidence-based, as rigorous methodological research on these issues is rare. The current research sought to identify barriers to the routine implementation of methodology research around recruitment and retention. Methods All registered UK clinical trials unit directors were sent a short questionnaire and invited to interview. Representatives of funding bodies and other stakeholders were also approached. Interviews were recorded and the content analysed. Results Data were grouped into four themes: acceptance of the need for methodological research; trial funding and development; trial processes; and organisational factors. The need to improve the evidence base for trials methodology is well established, but numerous barriers to implementation were perceived. Conclusions The knowledge and expertise required to routinely implement methodology research exists within the current research structures, and there are clear opportunities to develop the evidence base. However, for this to be achieved there is also a need for clear strategic coordination within the sector and promotion of the necessary resources.
Collapse
|
31
|
Kearney A, Harman NL, Rosala-Hallas A, Beecher C, Blazeby JM, Bower P, Clarke M, Cragg W, Duane S, Gardner H, Healy P, Maguire L, Mills N, Rooshenas L, Rowlands C, Treweek S, Vellinga A, Williamson PR, Gamble C. Development of an online resource for recruitment research in clinical trials to organise and map current literature. Clin Trials 2018; 15:533-542. [PMID: 30165760 PMCID: PMC6236587 DOI: 10.1177/1740774518796156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Background Recruiting the target number of participants within the pre-specified time
frame agreed with funders remains a common challenge in the completion of a
successful clinical trial and addressing this is an important methodological
priority. While there is growing research around recruitment, navigating
this literature to support an evidence-based approach remains difficult. The
Online resource for Recruitment Research in Clinical triAls project aims to
create an online searchable database of recruitment research to improve
access to existing evidence and to identify gaps for future research. Methods MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane
Methodology Register, Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences
Citation Index within the ISI Web of Science and Education Resources
Information Center were searched in January 2015. Search strategy results
were screened by title and abstract, and full text obtained for potentially
eligible articles. Studies reporting or evaluating strategies, interventions
or methods used to recruit patients were included along with case reports
and studies exploring reasons for patient participation or
non-participation. Eligible articles were categorised as systematic reviews,
nested randomised controlled trials and other designs evaluating the effects
of recruitment strategies (Level 1); studies that report the use of
recruitment strategies without an evaluation of impact (Level 2); or
articles reporting factors affecting recruitment without presenting a
particular recruitment strategy (Level 3). Articles were also assigned to 1,
or more, of 42 predefined recruitment domains grouped under 6
categories. Results More than 60,000 records were retrieved by the search, resulting in 56,030
unique titles and abstracts for screening, with a further 23 found through
hand searches. A total of 4570 full text articles were checked; 2804 were
eligible. Six percent of the included articles evaluated the effectiveness
of a recruitment strategy (Level 1), with most of these assessing aspects of
participant information, either its method of delivery (33%) or its content
and format (28%). Discussion Recruitment to clinical trials remains a common challenge and an important
area for future research. The online resource for Recruitment Research in
Clinical triAls project provides a searchable, online database of research
relevant to recruitment. The project has identified the need for researchers
to evaluate their recruitment strategies to improve the evidence base and
broaden the narrow focus of existing research to help meet the complex
challenges faced by those recruiting to clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Kearney
- 1 North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Nicola L Harman
- 1 North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Anna Rosala-Hallas
- 2 Clinical Trials Research Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Claire Beecher
- 3 Health Research Board - Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Jane M Blazeby
- 4 ConDuCT-II Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- 5 North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Population Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Mike Clarke
- 6 Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | | | - Sinead Duane
- 8 Health Research Board - Trials Methodology Research Network, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Heidi Gardner
- 9 Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Patricia Healy
- 3 Health Research Board - Trials Methodology Research Network, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Lisa Maguire
- 6 Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Nicola Mills
- 4 ConDuCT-II Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Leila Rooshenas
- 4 ConDuCT-II Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ceri Rowlands
- 4 ConDuCT-II Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- 9 Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Akke Vellinga
- 10 School of Medicine, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Paula R Williamson
- 1 North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Carrol Gamble
- 1 North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Jolly K, Sidhu MS, Hewitt CA, Coventry PA, Daley A, Jordan R, Heneghan C, Singh S, Ives N, Adab P, Jowett S, Varghese J, Nunan D, Ahmed K, Dowson L, Fitzmaurice D. Self management of patients with mild COPD in primary care: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2018; 361:k2241. [PMID: 29899047 PMCID: PMC5998171 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k2241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of telephone health coaching delivered by a nurse to support self management in a primary care population with mild symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). DESIGN Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING 71 general practices in four areas of England. PARTICIPANTS 577 patients with Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale scores of 1 or 2, recruited from primary care COPD registers with spirometry confirmed diagnosis. Patients were randomised to telephone health coaching (n=289) or usual care (n=288). INTERVENTIONS Telephone health coaching intervention delivered by nurses, underpinned by Social Cognitive Theory. The coaching promoted accessing smoking cessation services, increasing physical activity, medication management, and action planning (4 sessions over 11 weeks; postal information at weeks 16 and 24). The nurses received two days of training. The usual care group received a leaflet about COPD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was health related quality of life at 12 months using the short version of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C). RESULTS The intervention was delivered with good fidelity: 86% of scheduled calls were delivered; 75% of patients received all four calls. 92% of patients were followed-up at six months and 89% at 12 months. There was no difference in SGRQ-C total score at 12 months (mean difference -1.3, 95% confidence interval -3.6 to 0.9, P=0.23). Compared with patients in the usual care group, at six months follow-up, the intervention group reported greater physical activity, more had received a care plan (44% v 30%), rescue packs of antibiotics (37% v 29%), and inhaler use technique check (68% v 55%). CONCLUSIONS A new telephone health coaching intervention to promote behaviour change in primary care patients with mild symptoms of dyspnoea did lead to changes in self management activities, but did not improve health related quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current controlled trials ISRCTN 06710391.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Jolly
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Murray Learning Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2ER, UK
| | - Manbinder S Sidhu
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Catherine A Hewitt
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Amanda Daley
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
| | - Rachel Jordan
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Murray Learning Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2ER, UK
| | - Carl Heneghan
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Sally Singh
- Centre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Science, Biomedical Research Centre (Respiratory), University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester UK
| | - Natalie Ives
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Peymane Adab
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Murray Learning Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2ER, UK
| | - Susan Jowett
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Murray Learning Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2ER, UK
- Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jinu Varghese
- School of Education Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - David Nunan
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Khaled Ahmed
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Murray Learning Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2ER, UK
| | - Lee Dowson
- Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Dunleavy L, Walshe C, Oriani A, Preston N. Using the 'Social Marketing Mix Framework' to explore recruitment barriers and facilitators in palliative care randomised controlled trials? A narrative synthesis review. Palliat Med 2018; 32:990-1009. [PMID: 29485314 DOI: 10.1177/0269216318757623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effective recruitment to randomised controlled trials is critically important for a robust, trustworthy evidence base in palliative care. Many trials fail to achieve recruitment targets, but the reasons for this are poorly understood. Understanding barriers and facilitators is a critical step in designing optimal recruitment strategies. AIM To identify, explore and synthesise knowledge about recruitment barriers and facilitators in palliative care trials using the '6 Ps' of the 'Social Marketing Mix Framework'. DESIGN A systematic review with narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Embase databases (from January 1990 to early October 2016) were searched. Papers included the following: interventional and qualitative studies addressing recruitment, palliative care randomised controlled trial papers or reports containing narrative observations about the barriers, facilitators or strategies to increase recruitment. RESULTS A total of 48 papers met the inclusion criteria. Uninterested participants (Product), burden of illness (Price) and 'identifying eligible participants' were barriers. Careful messaging and the use of scripts/role play (Promotion) were recommended. The need for intensive resources and gatekeeping by professionals were barriers while having research staff on-site and lead clinician support (Working with Partners) was advocated. Most evidence is based on researchers' own reports of experiences of recruiting to trials rather than independent evaluation. CONCLUSION The 'Social Marketing Mix Framework' can help guide researchers when planning and implementing their recruitment strategy but suggested strategies need to be tested within embedded clinical trials. The findings of this review are applicable to all palliative care research and not just randomised controlled trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lesley Dunleavy
- International Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| | - Catherine Walshe
- International Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| | - Anna Oriani
- International Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| | - Nancy Preston
- International Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Jefferson L, Fairhurst C, Brealey S, Coleman E, Cook L, Hewitt C, Keding A, Northgraves M, Rangan A, Tew GA, Torgerson DJ, Dias J. Remote or on-site visits were feasible for the initial setup meetings with hospitals in a multicenter surgical trial: an embedded randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol 2018; 100:13-21. [PMID: 29679748 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2017] [Revised: 04/07/2018] [Accepted: 04/11/2018] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the effects, costs, and feasibility of providing on-site compared with remote meetings to set up hospital sites in a multicenter, surgical randomized controlled trial. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Hospitals were randomized to receive the initial trial setup meetings on-site (i.e., face-to-face) or remotely (i.e., via teleconference). Data were collected on site setup, recruitment, follow-up, and costs for the two methods. The hospital staff experience of trial setup was also surveyed. RESULTS Thirty-nine sites were randomized and 33 sites set up to recruit (19 on-site and 14 remote). For sites randomized to an on-site meeting compared with remote meeting respectively, the time from first contact to the first recruit was a median of 246 days (interquartile range [IQR] 196-346] vs. 212 days (IQR 154-266), mean recruitment was 10 participants (median 10, IQR 2-17) vs. 11 participants (median 6, IQR 5-23), and participant follow-up at 12 months was 81% vs. 82%. Sites allocated to an initial on-site visit cost on average £289.83 more to setup. CONCLUSION Remote or on-site visits are feasible for the initial setup meetings with hospitals in a multicenter surgical trial. This embedded trial should be replicated to improve generalizability and increase statistical power using meta-analysis. ISRCTN78899574.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Jefferson
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Area 4, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Caroline Fairhurst
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Brealey
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
| | - Elizabeth Coleman
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Liz Cook
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Catherine Hewitt
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Ada Keding
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Matthew Northgraves
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Amar Rangan
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Garry A Tew
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - David J Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York Trials Unit, Lower Ground Floor, ARRC Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
| | - Joseph Dias
- AToMS-Academic Team of Musculoskeletal Surgery, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Undercroft (nr Ward 28), Gwendolen Road, Leicester LE5 4PW, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Strömmer S, Lawrence W, Rose T, Vogel C, Watson D, Bottell JN, Parmenter J, Harvey NC, Cooper C, Inskip H, Baird J, Barker M. Improving recruitment to clinical trials during pregnancy: A mixed methods investigation. Soc Sci Med 2018; 200:73-82. [PMID: 29421474 PMCID: PMC6033317 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2017] [Revised: 12/31/2017] [Accepted: 01/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify reasons underlying women's refusal to participate in a pregnancy trial and to identify ways of increasing recruitment. DESIGN Mixed methods study using a questionnaire and qualitative interviews. SAMPLE A questionnaire asking them to indicate reasons for their decision was completed by 296 pregnant women who declined to participate in one of two trials of nutritional supplementation in a large teaching hospital in southern England. Qualitative interview data were collected from two samples of pregnant women: 1) 30 women who declined to participate in a trial but completed the questionnaire; and 2) 44 women who participated in a trial. RESULTS Questionnaire data from pregnant women who declined to participate suggested the major barriers to participation were study requirements, including taking study medication, having a bone scan or blood tests, or being too busy. Thematic analysis of interview data identified differences in self-efficacy and levels of trust in medical research between participants and decliners. Participants believed that the research would cause no harm, while decliners felt they or their unborn child would be at risk. When faced with potential obstacles, participants found ways around them while decliners felt they were insurmountable. CONCLUSIONS Recruitment methods for pregnancy trials should focus on building women's trust in the trial, and on enhancing women's self-efficacy so they feel able to meet trial requirements. Suggestions for building trust include investing time in open, honest discussion of the risks and benefits of participation, improving visibility of the research team, testimonials from previous participants and advertising study safety and ethical conduct. Self-efficacy can be enhanced by training research staff in empowering styles of communication enabling women to feel heard and supported to problem-solve. These strategies could be implemented relatively easily into pregnancy trial protocols, and their effectiveness tested through their impact on recruitment rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofia Strömmer
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
| | - Wendy Lawrence
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Taylor Rose
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK
| | - Christina Vogel
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Daniella Watson
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK
| | - Joanne N Bottell
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK
| | - Janice Parmenter
- NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Nicholas C Harvey
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Cyrus Cooper
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Oxford Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Hazel Inskip
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Janis Baird
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Mary Barker
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Chatters R, Newbould L, Sprange K, Hind D, Mountain G, Shortland K, Powell L, Gossage-Worrall R, Chater T, Keetharuth A, Lee E, Woods B. Recruitment of older adults to three preventative lifestyle improvement studies. Trials 2018; 19:121. [PMID: 29458392 PMCID: PMC5819193 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-018-2482-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2017] [Accepted: 01/18/2018] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruiting isolated older adults to clinical trials is complex, time-consuming and difficult. Previous studies have suggested querying existing databases to identify appropriate potential participants. We aim to compare recruitment techniques (general practitioner (GP) mail-outs, community engagement and clinician referrals) used in three randomised controlled trial (RCT) studies assessing the feasibility or effectiveness of two preventative interventions in isolated older adults (the Lifestyle Matters and Putting Life In Years interventions). METHODS During the three studies (the Lifestyle Matters feasibility study, the Lifestyle Matters RCT, the Putting Life In Years RCT) data were collected about how participants were recruited. The number of letters sent by GP surgeries for each study was recorded. In the Lifestyle Matters RCT, we qualitatively interviewed participants and intervention facilitators at 6 months post randomisation to seek their thoughts on the recruitment process. RESULTS Referrals were planned to be the main source of recruitment in the Lifestyle Matters feasibility study, but due to a lack of engagement from district nurses, community engagement was the main source of recruitment. District nurse referrals and community engagement were also utilised in the Lifestyle Matters and Putting Life In Years RCTs; both mechanisms yielded few participants. GP mail-outs were the main source of recruitment in both the RCTs, but of those contacted, recruiting yield was low (< 3%). Facilitators of the Lifestyle Matters intervention questioned whether the most appropriate individuals had been recruited. Participants recommended that direct contact with health professionals would be the most beneficial way to recruit. CONCLUSIONS Recruitment to the Lifestyle Matters RCT did not mirror recruitment to the feasibility study of the same intervention. Direct district nurse referrals were not effective at recruiting participants. The majority of participants were recruited via GP mail-outs, which may have led to isolated individuals not being recruited to the trials. Further research is required into alternative recruitment techniques, including respondent-driven sampling plus mechanisms which will promote health care professionals to recruit vulnerable populations to research. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry, ID: ISRCTN28645428 (Putting Life In Years RCT). Registered on 11 April 2012; International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry, ID: ISRCTN67209155 (Lifestyle Matters RCT). Registered on 22 March 2012; ClinicalTrials.gov , ID: NCT03054311 (Lifestyle Matters feasibility study). Registered retrospectively on 19 January 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robin Chatters
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Louise Newbould
- Research Fellow Mental Health and Addiction Research Group Department of Health Sciences ARRC Building University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD UK
| | - Kirsty Sprange
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
| | - Daniel Hind
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Gail Mountain
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Katy Shortland
- Sheffield NIHR Clinical Research Facility, O Floor, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2JF UK
| | - Lauren Powell
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Rebecca Gossage-Worrall
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Tim Chater
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Anju Keetharuth
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Ellen Lee
- School of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Bob Woods
- DSDC Wales, Bangor University, Normal Site, Bangor, LL57 2PZ UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Loskutova NY, Smail C, Ajayi K, Pace WD, Fox CH. Recruiting primary care practices for practice-based research: a case study of a group-randomized study (TRANSLATE CKD) recruitment process. Fam Pract 2018; 35:111-116. [PMID: 28985294 PMCID: PMC6454459 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmx064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We assessed the challenging process of recruiting primary care practices in a practice-based research study. METHODS In this descriptive case study of recruitment data collected for a large practice-based study (TRANSLATE CKD), 48 single or multiple-site health care organizations in the USA with a total of 114 practices were invited to participate. We collected quantitative and qualitative measures of recruitment process and outcomes for the first 25 practices recruited. Information about 13 additional practices is not provided due to staff transitions and limited data collection resources. RESULTS Initial outreach was made to 114 practices (from 48 organizations, 41% small); 52 (45%) practices responded with interest. Practices enrolled in the study (n = 25) represented 22% of the total outreach number, or 48% of those initially interested. Average time to enroll was 71 calendar days (range 11-107). There was no difference in the number of days practices remained under recruitment, based on enrolled versus not enrolled (44.8 ± 30.4 versus 46.8 ± 25.4 days, P = 0.86) or by the organization size, i.e. large versus small (defined by having ≤4 distinct practices; 52 ± 23.6 versus 43.6 ± 27.8 days; P = 0.46). The most common recruitment barriers were administrative, e.g. lack of perceived direct organizational benefit, and were more prominent among large organizations. CONCLUSIONS Despite the general belief that the research topic, invitation method, and interest in research may facilitate practice recruitment, our results suggest that most of the recruitment challenges represent managerial challenges. Future research projects may need to consider relevant methodologies from businesses administration and marketing fields.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalia Y Loskutova
- American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network, Leawood, KS, USA
| | - Craig Smail
- American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network, Leawood, KS, USA
| | - Kemi Ajayi
- American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network, Leawood, KS, USA
| | | | - Chester H Fox
- Greater Buffalo United Accountable Healthcare Network (GBUAHN), Buffalo, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Kenning C, Lovell K, Hann M, Agius R, Bee PE, Chew-Graham C, Coventry PA, van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Gilbody S, Hardy G, Kellett S, Kessler D, McMillan D, Reeves D, Rick J, Sutton M, Bower P. Collaborative case management to aid return to work after long-term sickness absence: a pilot randomised controlled trial. PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH 2018. [DOI: 10.3310/phr06020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BackgroundDespite high levels of employment among working-age adults in the UK, there is still a significant minority who are off work with ill health at any one time (so-called ‘sickness absence’). Long-term sickness absence results in significant costs to the individual, to the employer and to wider society.ObjectiveThe overall objective of the intervention was to improve employee well-being with a view to aiding return to work. To meet this aim, a collaborative case management intervention was adapted to the needs of UK employees who were entering or experiencing long-term sickness absence.DesignA pilot randomised controlled trial, using permuted block randomisation. Recruitment of patients with long-term conditions in settings such as primary care was achieved by screening of routine records, followed by mass mailing of invitations to participants. However, the proportion of patients responding to such invitations can be low, raising concerns about external validity. Recruitment in the Case Management to Enhance Occupational Support (CAMEOS) study used this method to test whether or not it would transfer to a population with long-term sickness absence in the context of occupational health (OH).ParticipantsEmployed people on long-term sickness absence (between 4 weeks and 12 months). The pilot was run with two different collaborators: a large organisation that provided OH services for a number of clients and a non-profit community-based organisation.InterventionCollaborative case management was delivered by specially trained case managers from the host organisations. Sessions were delivered by telephone and supported use of a self-help handbook. The comparator was usual care as provided by participants’ general practitioner (GP) or OH provider. This varied for participants according to the services available to them. Neither participants nor the research team were blind to randomisation.Main outcome measuresRecruitment rates, intervention delivery and acceptability to participants were the main outcomes. Well-being, as measured by the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM), and return-to-work rates were also recorded.ResultsIn total, over 1000 potentially eligible participants were identified across the sites and invited to participate. However, responses were received from just 61 of those invited (5.5%), of whom 16 (1.5%) were randomised to the trial (seven to treatment, nine to control). Detailed information on recruitment methods, intervention delivery, engagement and acceptability is presented. No harms were reported in either group.ConclusionsThis pilot study faced a number of barriers, particularly in terms of recruitment of employers to host the research. Our ability to respond to these challenges faced several barriers related to the OH context and the study set up. The intervention seemed feasible and acceptable when delivered, although caution is required because of the small number of randomised participants. However, employees’ lack of engagement in the research might imply that they did not see the intervention as valuable.Future workDeveloping effective and acceptable ways of reducing sickness absence remains a high priority. We discuss possible ways of overcoming these challenges in the future, including incentives for employers, alternative study designs and further modifications to recruitment methods.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN33560198.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Public Health Research programme and will be published in full inPublic Health Research; Vol. 6, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cassandra Kenning
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Karina Lovell
- School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Mark Hann
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Raymond Agius
- Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Penny E Bee
- School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | | | | | - Simon Gilbody
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Gillian Hardy
- Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Stephen Kellett
- Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - David Kessler
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Dean McMillan
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - David Reeves
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Joanne Rick
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Matthew Sutton
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Maxwell AE, Parker RA, Drever J, Rudd A, Dennis MS, Weir CJ, Al-Shahi Salman R. Promoting Recruitment using Information Management Efficiently (PRIME): a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised trial of a complex recruitment intervention embedded within the REstart or Stop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial. Trials 2017; 18:623. [PMID: 29282142 PMCID: PMC5745698 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2355-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2017] [Accepted: 11/17/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Few interventions are proven to increase recruitment in clinical trials. Recruitment to RESTART, a randomised controlled trial of secondary prevention after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage, has been slower than expected. Therefore, we sought to investigate an intervention to boost recruitment to RESTART. Methods/design We conducted a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised trial of a complex intervention to increase recruitment, embedded within the RESTART trial. The primary objective was to investigate if the PRIME complex intervention (a recruitment co-ordinator who conducts a recruitment review, provides access to bespoke stroke audit data exports, and conducts a follow-up review after 6 months) increases the recruitment rate to RESTART. We included 72 hospital sites located in England, Wales, or Scotland that were active in RESTART in June 2015. All sites began in the control state and were allocated using block randomisation stratified by hospital location (Scotland versus England/Wales) to start the complex intervention in one of 12 different months. The primary outcome was the number of patients randomised into RESTART per month per site. We quantified the effect of the complex intervention on the primary outcome using a negative binomial, mixed model adjusting for site, December/January months, site location, and background time trends in recruitment rate. Results We recruited and randomised 72 sites and recorded their monthly recruitment to RESTART over 24 months (March 2015 to February 2017 inclusive), providing 1728 site-months of observations for the primary analysis. The adjusted rate ratio for the number of patients randomised per month after allocation to the PRIME complex intervention versus control time before allocation to the PRIME complex intervention was 1.06 (95% confidence interval 0.55 to 2.03, p = 0.87). Although two thirds of respondents to the 6-month follow-up questionnaire agreed that the audit reports were useful, only six patients were reported to have been randomised using the audit reports. Respondents frequently reported resource and time pressures as being key barriers to running the audit reports. Conclusion The PRIME complex intervention did not significantly improve the recruitment rate to RESTART. Further research is needed to establish if PRIME might be beneficial at an earlier stage in a prevention trial or for prevention dilemmas that arise more often in clinical practice. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2355-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy E Maxwell
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK
| | - Richard A Parker
- Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit and Centre for Population Health Sciences, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jonathan Drever
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK
| | - Anthony Rudd
- St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London, UK
| | - Martin S Dennis
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK
| | - Christopher J Weir
- Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit and Centre for Population Health Sciences, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Rustam Al-Shahi Salman
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Amstutz A, Schandelmaier S, Frei R, Surina J, Agarwal A, Olu KK, Alturki R, Von Niederhäusern B, Von Elm E, Briel M. Discontinuation and non-publication of randomised clinical trials supported by the main public funding body in Switzerland: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e016216. [PMID: 28765131 PMCID: PMC5642669 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2017] [Revised: 06/02/2017] [Accepted: 06/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) promotes academic excellence through competitive selection of study proposals and rigorous evaluation of feasibility, but completion status and publication history of SNSF-supported randomised clinical trials (RCTs) remain unclear. The main objectives were to review all healthcare RCTs supported by the SNSF for trial discontinuation and non-publication, to investigate potential risk factors for trial discontinuation due to poor recruitment and non-publication, and to compare findings to other Swiss RCTs not supported by the SNSF. DESIGN We established a retrospective cohort of all SNSF-supported RCTs for which recruitment and funding had ended in 2015 or earlier. For each RCT, two investigators independently searched corresponding publications in electronic databases. In addition, we approached all principal investigators to ask for additional publications and information about trial discontinuation. Teams of two investigators independently extracted details about study design, recruitment of participants, outcomes, analysis and sample size from the original proposal and, if available, from trial registries and publications. We used multivariable regression analysis to explore potential risk factors associated with discontinuation due to poor recruitment and with non-publication, and to compare our results with data from a previous cohort of Swiss RCTs not supported by the SNSF. RESULTS We included 101 RCTs supported by the SNSF between 1986 and 2015. Eighty-seven (86%) principal investigators responded to our survey. Overall, 69 (68%) RCTs were completed, 26 (26%) RCTs were prematurely discontinued (all due to slow recruitment) and the completion status remained unclear for 6 (6%) RCTs. For analysing publication status, we excluded 4 RCTs for which follow-up was still ongoing and 9 for which manuscripts were still in preparation. Of the remaining 88 RCTs, 53 (60%) were published as full articles in peer-reviewed journals. Multivariable regression models suggested that discontinued trials were at higher risk for non-publication than completed trials (adjusted OR 7.61; 95% CI 2.44 to 27.09). Compared with other Swiss RCTs, the risk of discontinuation for SNSF-supported RCTs was higher than in industry-initiated RCTs (adjusted OR 3.84; 95% CI 1.68 to 8.74), but not significantly different from investigator-initiated RCTs not supported by the SNSF (adjusted OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.51 to 2.11). We found no evidence that the proportion of discontinued or unpublished RCTs decreased over the last 20 years. CONCLUSIONS One out of four SNSF-supported RCTs were prematurely discontinued due to slow recruitment, 40% of all included RCTs and 70% of all discontinued RCTs were not published in peer-reviewed journals. There is a case to reconsider how public funding bodies such as the SNSF could improve their feasibility assessment and promote publication of RCTs irrespective of completion status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alain Amstutz
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Stefan Schandelmaier
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Roy Frei
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Jakub Surina
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Arnav Agarwal
- Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelechi Kalu Olu
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Reem Alturki
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Erik Von Elm
- Cochrane Switzerland, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Matthias Briel
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
The effect of using social pressure in cover letters to improve retention in a longitudinal health study: an embedded randomised controlled retention trial. Trials 2017; 18:341. [PMID: 28728603 PMCID: PMC5520383 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2090-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2017] [Accepted: 07/05/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Retention of participants in cohort studies is important for validity. One way to promote retention is by sending a persuasive cover letter with surveys. The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a covering letter containing social pressure with a standard covering letter on retention in a health cohort study. Social pressure involves persuading people to behave in a certain way by the promise that their actions will be made know to others. We implemented a mild form of social pressure, where the recipient was told that information about whether they responded to the current survey would be noted by the research team and printed on future correspondence from the research team to the recipient. Methods The design was an embedded randomised controlled retention trial, conducted between July 2015 and April 2016 in Salford, UK. Participants in the host health cohort study were eligible. They received either: (1) a covering letter with two consecutive surveys (sent six and twelve months after recruitment), containing a social pressure intervention; or (2) a matching letter without the social pressure text. The primary outcome was retention in the host study, defined as return of both surveys. Randomisation was computer-generated, with stratification by household size. Participants were blinded to group assignment. Researchers were blinded for outcome ascertainment. Results Adults (n = 4447) aged over 65 years, with a long-term condition and enrolled in the host study, were randomly allocated to receive a social pressure covering letter (n = 2223) or control (n = 2224). All 4447 participants were included in the analysis. Both questionnaires were returned by 1577 participants (71%) sent the social pressure letters and 1511 (68%) sent control letters, a risk difference of 3 percentage points (adjusted odds ratio = 1.16 (95% confidence interval = 1.02–1.33)). Conclusion A mild form of social pressure made a small but significant improvement in retention of older adults in a health cohort study. Investigation of social pressure across other research contexts and stronger social pressure messages is warranted. Trial registration The host cohort study, the Comprehensive Longitudinal Assessment of Salford Integrated Care (CLASSIC) study is associated with the CLASSIC PROTECTs trial, which is registered on the ISRCTN registry. Trial registration number: ISRCTN12286422. Date of registration 19 June 2014. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2090-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
42
|
Martin-Kerry J, Bower P, Young B, Graffy J, Sheridan R, Watt I, Baines P, Stones C, Preston J, Higgins S, Gamble C, Knapp P. Developing and evaluating multimedia information resources to improve engagement of children, adolescents, and their parents with trials (TRECA study): Study protocol for a series of linked randomised controlled trials. Trials 2017; 18:265. [PMID: 28595613 PMCID: PMC5465557 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-1962-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2016] [Accepted: 05/02/2017] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Randomised controlled trials are widely established as the best method for testing health interventions whilst minimising bias. However, recruitment and subsequent retention of children and adolescents in healthcare trials is challenging. Participant information sheets are often lengthy and difficult to read and understand. Presenting key information using multimedia may help to overcome these limitations and better support young people and their parents in deciding whether to participate in a clinical trial. Methods The TRECA (TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents) study has two phases. The first phase involves a qualitative study with children and adolescents and their parents to inform the development of multimedia information resources and iterative user testing to refine the resources. The second phase will embed the use of the multimedia information resources into six host trials in the United Kingdom. Patients and parents approached to participate in the host trials will be randomly allocated to either use the multimedia information resource in conjunction with standard participant information sheets, the multimedia information resource alone, or the standard participant information sheets alone. The primary outcome will be the effect of the multimedia information resources on recruitment into trials. Other outcomes measured include the effect of multimedia information resources on retention of participants into the host trials and the impact on family members’ decision-making processes, when compared to standard participant information sheets alone. Discussion This study will inform whether multimedia information resources, when developed using participatory design principles, are able to increase recruitment and retention of children and adolescents into trials. There is also the potential for patients to make better informed decisions through the use of multimedia information resources. The multimedia information resources also have the potential to assist with providing information on other healthcare decisions outside of clinical trials. Trial registration ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN73136092 (doi:10.1186/ISRCTN73136092). Registered on 24 August 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1962-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Peter Bower
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, M13 9PL, Manchester, UK
| | - Bridget Young
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Department of Psychological Sciences, Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, L69 3GB, Liverpool, UK
| | - Jonathan Graffy
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, CB2 0SR, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rebecca Sheridan
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK
| | - Ian Watt
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK
| | - Paul Baines
- Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Alder Hey Hospital, L12 2AP, Liverpool, UK
| | - Catherine Stones
- School of Design, Clothworkers' Central, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK
| | - Jennifer Preston
- NIHR Alder Hey Clinical Research Facility, University of Liverpool, Institute in the Park, Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Eaton Rd, L12 2AP, Liverpool, UK
| | - Steven Higgins
- School of Education, University of Durham, DH1 3LE, Durham, UK
| | - Carrol Gamble
- Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, L69 3GB, Liverpool, UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Berge E, Salman RAS, van der Worp HB, Stapf C, Sandercock P, Sprigg N, Macleod MR, Kelly PJ, Nederkoorn PJ, Ford GA, Arnold M, Berge E, Diez-Tejedor E, Jatuzis D, Kelly PJ, Krieger DW, Nederkoorn PJ, Sandercock P, Stapf C, Weimar C, Ford GA, Salman RAS. Increasing value and reducing waste in stroke research. Lancet Neurol 2017; 16:399-408. [DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(17)30078-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2016] [Revised: 02/06/2017] [Accepted: 03/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|
44
|
Cockayne S, Fairhurst C, Adamson J, Hewitt C, Hull R, Hicks K, Keenan AM, Lamb SE, Green L, McIntosh C, Menz HB, Redmond AC, Rodgers S, Torgerson DJ, Vernon W, Watson J, Knapp P, Rick J, Bower P, Eldridge S, Madurasinghe VW, Graffy J. An optimised patient information sheet did not significantly increase recruitment or retention in a falls prevention study: an embedded randomised recruitment trial. Trials 2017; 18:144. [PMID: 28351376 PMCID: PMC5370466 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-1797-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2016] [Accepted: 01/11/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Randomised controlled trials are generally regarded as the ‘gold standard’ experimental design to determine the effectiveness of an intervention. Unfortunately, many trials either fail to recruit sufficient numbers of participants, or recruitment takes longer than anticipated. The current embedded trial evaluates the effectiveness of optimised patient information sheets on recruitment of participants in a falls prevention trial. Methods A three-arm, embedded randomised methodology trial was conducted within the National Institute for Health Research-funded REducing Falls with ORthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) cohort randomised controlled trial. Routine National Health Service podiatry patients over the age of 65 were randomised to receive either the control patient information sheet (PIS) for the host trial or one of two optimised versions, a bespoke user-tested PIS or a template-developed PIS. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group who went on to be randomised to the host trial. Results Six thousand and nine hundred patients were randomised 1:1:1 into the embedded trial. A total of 193 (2.8%) went on to be randomised into the main REFORM trial (control n = 62, template-developed n = 68; bespoke user-tested n = 63). Information sheet allocation did not improve recruitment to the trial (odds ratios for the three pairwise comparisons: template vs control 1.10 (95% CI 0.77–1.56, p = 0.60); user-tested vs control 1.01 (95% CI 0.71–1.45, p = 0.94); and user-tested vs template 0.92 (95% CI 0.65–1.31, p = 0.65)). Conclusions This embedded methodology trial has demonstrated limited evidence as to the benefit of using optimised information materials on recruitment and retention rates in the REFORM study. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry, ISRCTN68240461. Registered on 01 July 2011. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1797-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Cockayne
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Caroline Fairhurst
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Joy Adamson
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Catherine Hewitt
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Robin Hull
- Podiatry Services, Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust, Harrogate District Hospital, Lancaster Park Road, Harrogate, UK
| | - Kate Hicks
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Anne-Maree Keenan
- NIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK.,Leeds Institute of Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Sarah E Lamb
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Kadoorie Critical Care Research Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Lorraine Green
- NIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK.,Leeds Institute of Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Caroline McIntosh
- School of Health Sciences, Áras Moyola, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Hylton B Menz
- Lower Extremity and Gait Studies Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, 3086, Victoria, Australia
| | - Anthony C Redmond
- NIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK.,Leeds Institute of Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Sara Rodgers
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - David J Torgerson
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Wesley Vernon
- The School of Human & Health Sciences, Division of Podiatry, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK
| | - Judith Watson
- Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Peter Knapp
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Jo Rick
- Medical Research Council North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| | - Peter Bower
- Medical Research Council North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit (PCTU), Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute, Yvonne Carter Building, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| | - Vichithranie W Madurasinghe
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit (PCTU), Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute, Yvonne Carter Building, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| | - Jonathan Graffy
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Hughes-Morley A, Hann M, Fraser C, Meade O, Lovell K, Young B, Roberts C, Cree L, More D, O’Leary N, Callaghan P, Waheed W, Bower P. The impact of advertising patient and public involvement on trial recruitment: embedded cluster randomised recruitment trial. Trials 2016; 17:586. [PMID: 27931252 PMCID: PMC5146878 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1718-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2016] [Accepted: 11/19/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient and public involvement in research (PPIR) may improve trial recruitment rates, but it is unclear how. Where trials use PPIR to improve design and conduct, many do not communicate this clearly to potential participants. Better communication of PPIR might encourage patient enrolment, as trials may be perceived as more socially valid, relevant and trustworthy. We aimed to evaluate the impact on recruitment of directly advertising PPIR to potential trial participants. METHODS This is a cluster trial, embedded within a host trial ('EQUIP') recruiting service users diagnosed with severe mental illness. The intervention was informed by a systematic review, a qualitative study, social comparison theory and a stakeholder workshop including service users and carers. Adopting Participatory Design approaches, we co-designed the recruitment intervention with PPIR partners using a leaflet to advertise the PPIR in EQUIP and sent potential participants invitations with the leaflet (intervention group) or not (control group). Primary outcome was the proportion of patients enrolled in EQUIP. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of patients who positively responded to the trial invitation. RESULTS Thirty-four community mental health teams were randomised and 8182 service users invited. For the primary outcome, 4% of patients in the PPIR group were enrolled versus 5.3% of the control group. The intervention was not effective for improving recruitment rates (adjusted OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.53 to 1.07, p = 0.113). For the secondary outcome of positive response, the intervention was not effective, with 7.3% of potential participants in the intervention group responding positively versus 7.9% of the control group (adjusted OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.53 to 1.04, p = 0.082). We did not find a positive impact of directly advertising PPIR on any other outcomes. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest ever embedded trial to evaluate a recruitment or PPIR intervention. Advertising PPIR did not improve enrolment rates or any other outcome. It is possible that rather than advertising PPIR being the means to improve recruitment, PPIR may have an alternative impact on trials by making them more attractive, acceptable and patient-centred. We discuss potential reasons for our findings and implications for recruitment practice and research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS ISRCTN, ISRCTN16488358 . Registered on 14 May 2014. Study Within A Trial, SWAT-26 . Registered on 21 January 2016.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adwoa Hughes-Morley
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, YO10 5DD UK
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Mark Hann
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Claire Fraser
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Oonagh Meade
- School of Health Sciences, Queen’s Medical Centre, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2HA UK
| | - Karina Lovell
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Bridget Young
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Chris Roberts
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Lindsey Cree
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Donna More
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Neil O’Leary
- HRB Clinical Research Facility, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Republic of Ireland
| | - Patrick Callaghan
- School of Health Sciences and Institute of Mental Health, The University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham, NG7 2TU UK
| | - Waquas Waheed
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Peter Bower
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PT UK
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Edge D, Degnan A, Cotterill S, Berry K, Drake R, Baker J, Barrowclough C, Hughes-Morley A, Grey P, Bhugra D, Cahoon P, Tarrier N, Lewis S, Abel K. Culturally-adapted Family Intervention (CaFI) for African-Caribbeans diagnosed with schizophrenia and their families: a feasibility study protocol of implementation and acceptability. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2016; 2:39. [PMID: 27965857 PMCID: PMC5154101 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-016-0070-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2015] [Accepted: 06/24/2016] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND African-Caribbeans in the UK have the highest schizophrenia incidence and greatest inequity in access to mental health services of all ethnic groups. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) highlights this crisis in care and urgent need to improve evidence-based mental healthcare, experiences of services and outcomes for this group. Family intervention (FI) is clinically and cost-effective for the management of schizophrenia but it is rarely offered. Evidence for FI with minority ethnic groups generally, and African-Caribbeans in particular, is lacking. This study aims to test the feasibility and acceptability of delivering Culturally-adapted Family Intervention (CaFI) to African-Caribbean service users diagnosed with schizophrenia. METHODS/DESIGN This is a feasibility cohort design study. Over a 12-month intervention period, 30 service users and their families, recruited from hospital and community settings, will receive ten one-hourly sessions of CaFI. Where biological families are absent, access to the intervention will be optimised through 'family support members'; trusted individuals nominated by service users or study volunteers. We shall collect data on eligibility, uptake, retention and attrition and assess the utility and feasibility of collecting various outcome measures including readmission, service engagement, working alliance, clinical symptoms and functioning, perceived criticism, psychosis knowledge, familial stress and economic costs. Measures will be collected at baseline, post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up using validated questionnaires and standardised interviews. Admission rates and change in care management will be rated by independent case note examination. Variability in the measures will inform sample size estimates for a future trial. Independent raters will assess fidelity to the intervention in 10 % of sessions. Feedback at the end of each session along with thematically-analysed qualitative interviews will examine CaFI's acceptability to service users, families and healthcare professionals. DISCUSSION This innovative response to inequalities in mental healthcare experienced by African-Caribbeans diagnosed with schizophrenia might improve engagement in services, access to evidence-based interventions and clinical outcomes. Successful implementation of CaFI in this group could pave the way for better engagement and provision across marginalised groups and therefore has potentially important implications for commissioning and service delivery in ethnically diverse populations. This study will demonstrate whether the approach is feasible and acceptable and can be implemented with fidelity in different settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dawn Edge
- Centre for Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, G6 Coupland Building, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Amy Degnan
- Centre for Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Third Floor Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, UK
| | - Sarah Cotterill
- Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Katherine Berry
- School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Second Floor Zochonis Building, Manchester, UK
| | - Richard Drake
- Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Third Floor Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, UK
- Manchester Mental Health & Social Care Trust, 70 Manchester Rd, Manchester, M21 9UN UK
| | - John Baker
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Baines Wing, Leeds, LS2 9JT UK
| | - Christine Barrowclough
- School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Second Floor Zochonis Building, Manchester, UK
| | - Adwoa Hughes-Morley
- MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, UK
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Paul Grey
- Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Third Floor Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, UK
| | - Dinesh Bhugra
- Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College London, London, WC2R 2LS UK
| | - Patrick Cahoon
- Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust, Chorlton House, Chorlton, Manchester, UK
| | - Nicholas Tarrier
- Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College London, London, WC2R 2LS UK
| | - Shôn Lewis
- Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Third Floor Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, UK
| | - Kathryn Abel
- Centre for Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Third Floor Jean McFarlane Building, Manchester, UK
- Manchester Mental Health & Social Care Trust, 70 Manchester Rd, Manchester, M21 9UN UK
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Briel M, Olu KK, von Elm E, Kasenda B, Alturki R, Agarwal A, Bhatnagar N, Schandelmaier S. A systematic review of discontinued trials suggested that most reasons for recruitment failure were preventable. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 80:8-15. [PMID: 27498376 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.07.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 123] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2015] [Revised: 07/14/2016] [Accepted: 07/29/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To collect and classify reported reasons for recruitment failure in discontinued randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to assess reporting quality. METHODS We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (2010-2014) and a previous cohort of RCTs for published RCTs reporting trial discontinuation due to poor recruitment. Teams of two investigators selected eligible RCTs working independently and extracted information using standardized forms. We used an iterative approach to classify reasons for poor recruitment. RESULTS We included 172 RCTs discontinued due to poor recruitment (including 26 conference abstracts and 63 industry-funded RCTs). Of those, 131 (76%) reported one or more reasons for discontinuation due to poor recruitment. We identified 28 different reasons for recruitment failure; most frequently mentioned were overestimation of prevalence of eligible participants and prejudiced views of recruiters and participants on trial interventions. Few RCTs reported relevant details about the recruitment process such as how eligible participants were identified, the number of patients assessed for eligibility, and who actually recruited participants. CONCLUSION Our classification could serve as a checklist to assist investigators in the planning of RCTs. Most reasons for recruitment failure seem preventable with a pilot study that applies the planned informed consent procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Briel
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 12, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
| | - Kelechi Kalu Olu
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 12, 4031 Basel, Switzerland
| | - Erik von Elm
- Cochrane Switzerland, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), Lausanne University Hospital, Route de la Corniche 10, Lausanne, 1010, Switzerland
| | - Benjamin Kasenda
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 12, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Department of Oncology, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, Basel, 4031, Switzerland
| | - Reem Alturki
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 12, 4031 Basel, Switzerland
| | - Arnav Agarwal
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | - Neera Bhatnagar
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | - Stefan Schandelmaier
- Department of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 12, 4031 Basel, Switzerland; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Berge E, Stapf C, Al-Shahi Salman R, Ford GA, Sandercock P, van der Worp HB, Petersson J, Dippel DWJ, Krieger DW, Lees KR. Methods to improve patient recruitment and retention in stroke trials. Int J Stroke 2016; 11:663-676. [DOI: 10.1177/1747493016641963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/30/2023]
Abstract
Background The success of randomized-controlled stroke trials is dependent on the recruitment and retention of a sufficient number of patients, but fewer than half of all trials meet their target number of patients. Methods We performed a search and review of the literature, and conducted a survey and workshop among 56 European stroke trialists, to identify barriers, suggest methods to improve recruitment and retention, and make a priority list of interventions that merit further evaluation. Results The survey and workshop identified a number of barriers to patient recruitment and retention, from patients’ incapacity to consent, to handicaps that prevent patients from participation in trial-specific follow-up. Methods to improve recruitment and retention may include simple interventions with individual participants, funding of research networks, and reimbursement of new treatments by health services only when delivered within clinical trials. The literature review revealed that few methods have been formally evaluated. The top five priorities for evaluation identified in the workshop were as follows: short and illustrated patient information leaflets, nonwritten consent, reimbursement for new interventions only within a study, and monetary incentives to institutions taking part in research (for recruitment); and involvement of patient groups, remote and central follow-up, use of mobile devices, and reminders to patients about their consent to participate (for retention). Conclusions Many interventions have been used with the aim of improving recruitment and retention of patients in stroke studies, but only a minority has been evaluated. We have identified methods that could be tested, and propose that such evaluations may be nested within on-going clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eivind Berge
- Dept of Internal Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Christian Stapf
- Dept of Neuroscience, CRCHUM, University of Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - Gary A Ford
- Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Peter Sandercock
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - H Bart van der Worp
- Dept of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jesper Petersson
- Dept of Neurology and Rehabilitation, Skåne University Hospital and Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Diederik WJ Dippel
- Dept of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Kennedy R Lees
- Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Stevens N, Edwards L, Balayah Z, Hooper R, Knowles C. Risk based survey evidence supports electronic informed consent as a recruitment method for UK clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 77:134-136. [PMID: 27251200 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2015] [Accepted: 05/23/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Natasha Stevens
- National Bowel Research Centre, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, 4 Newark Street, Whitechapel, London E1 2AT, UK.
| | - Lara Edwards
- Department of Medical Microbiology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Road, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK
| | - Zuhur Balayah
- Barts and The London Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary, University of London, 58 Turner St, Whitechapel E1 2AB, UK
| | - Richard Hooper
- Barts and The London Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary, University of London, 58 Turner St, Whitechapel E1 2AB, UK
| | - Charles Knowles
- National Bowel Research Centre, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, 4 Newark Street, Whitechapel, London E1 2AT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Raine R, Fitzpatrick R, Barratt H, Bevan G, Black N, Boaden R, Bower P, Campbell M, Denis JL, Devers K, Dixon-Woods M, Fallowfield L, Forder J, Foy R, Freemantle N, Fulop NJ, Gibbons E, Gillies C, Goulding L, Grieve R, Grimshaw J, Howarth E, Lilford RJ, McDonald R, Moore G, Moore L, Newhouse R, O’Cathain A, Or Z, Papoutsi C, Prady S, Rycroft-Malone J, Sekhon J, Turner S, Watson SI, Zwarenstein M. Challenges, solutions and future directions in the evaluation of service innovations in health care and public health. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2016. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr04160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
HeadlineEvaluating service innovations in health care and public health requires flexibility, collaboration and pragmatism; this collection identifies robust, innovative and mixed methods to inform such evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosalind Raine
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ray Fitzpatrick
- Health Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Helen Barratt
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames, Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gywn Bevan
- Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Nick Black
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Ruth Boaden
- Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Greater Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Marion Campbell
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Jean-Louis Denis
- Canada Research Chair in Governance and Transformation of Health Organizations and Systems, École Nationale d’Administration Publique, Ville de Québec, QC, Canada
| | - Kelly Devers
- Health Policy Centre, Urban Institute, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Mary Dixon-Woods
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Lesley Fallowfield
- Sussex Health Outcomes Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
| | - Julien Forder
- School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Nick Freemantle
- Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Naomi J Fulop
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Elizabeth Gibbons
- Health Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Clare Gillies
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) East Midlands and NIHR Research Design Service East Midlands, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Lucy Goulding
- King’s Improvement Science, Centre for Implementation Science, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Richard Grieve
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Jeremy Grimshaw
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Emma Howarth
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) East of England, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Ruth McDonald
- Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Graham Moore
- School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Laurence Moore
- Medical Research Council (MRC)/Chief Scientist Office (CSO) Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Robin Newhouse
- Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Alicia O’Cathain
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Zeynep Or
- Institut de Recherche et Documentation en Économie de la Santé, Paris, France
| | - Chrysanthi Papoutsi
- Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Northwest London, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Jasjeet Sekhon
- Department of Political Science and Statistics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
| | - Simon Turner
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Merrick Zwarenstein
- Centre for Studies in Family Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|