Accrual and drop out in a primary prevention randomised controlled trial: qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recruitment and retention of participants are critical to the success of a randomised controlled trial. Gaining the views of potential trial participants who decline to enter a trial and of trial participants who stop the trial treatment is important and can help to improve study processes. Limited research on these issues has been conducted on healthy individuals recruited for prevention trials in the community.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Semi-structured interviews with people who were eligible but had declined to participate in the Aspirin for Asymptomatic Atherosclerosis (AAA) trial (N = 11), and AAA trial participants who had stopped taking the trial medication (N = 11). A focus group with further participants who had stopped taking the trial medication (N = 6). (Total participants N = 28).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Explanations for declining to participate could be divided into two groups: the first group were characterised by a lack of necessity to participate and a tendency to prioritise other largely mundane problems. The second group's concern was with a high level of perceived risk from participating.</p> <p>Explanations for stopping trial medication fell into four categories: side effects attributed to the trial medication; starting on aspirin or medication contraindicating to aspirin; experiencing an outcome event, and changing one's mind.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results indicate that when planning trials (especially in preventive medicine) particular attention should be given to designing appropriate recruitment materials and processes that fully inform potential recruits of the risks and benefits of participation.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN66587262</p

Screening for type 2 diabetes is feasible, acceptable, but associated with increased short-term anxiety: A randomised controlled trial in British general practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To assess the feasibility and uptake of a diabetes screening programme; to examine the effects of invitation to diabetes screening on anxiety, self-rated health and illness perceptions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Randomised controlled trial in two general practices in Cambridgeshire. Individuals aged 40–69 without known diabetes were identified as being at high risk of having undiagnosed type 2 diabetes using patient records and a validated risk score (n = 1,280). 355 individuals were randomised in a 2 to 1 ratio into non-invited (n = 238) and invited (n = 116) groups. A stepwise screening programme confirmed the presence or absence of diabetes. Six weeks after the last contact (either test or invitation), a questionnaire was sent to all participants, including non-attenders and those who were not originally invited. Outcome measures included attendance, anxiety (short-form Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory-STAI), self-rated health and diabetes illness perceptions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>95 people (82% of those invited) attended for the initial capillary blood test. Six individuals were diagnosed with diabetes. Invited participants were more anxious than those not invited (37.6 vs. 34.1 STAI, p-value = 0.015), and those diagnosed with diabetes were considerably more anxious than those classified free of diabetes (46.7 vs. 37.0 STAI, p-value = 0.031). Non-attenders had a higher mean treatment control sub-scale (3.87 vs. 3.56, p-value = 0.016) and a lower mean emotional representation sub-scale (1.81 vs. 2.68, p-value = 0.001) than attenders. No differences in the other five illness perception sub-scales or self-rated health were found.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Screening for type 2 diabetes in primary care is feasible but may be associated with higher levels of short-term anxiety among invited compared with non-invited participants.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN99175498</p

Depression, Anxiety and Glucose Metabolism in the General Dutch Population: The New Hoorn Study

BACKGROUND: There is a well recognized association between depression and diabetes. However, there is little empirical data about the prevalence of depressive symptoms and anxiety among different groups of glucose metabolism in population based samples. The aim of this study was to determine whether the prevalence of increased levels of depression and anxiety is different between patients with type 2 diabetes and subjects with impaired glucose metabolism (IGM) and normal glucose metabolism (NGM). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Cross-sectional data from a population-based cohort study of 2667 residents, 1261 men and 1406 women aged 40-65 years from the Hoorn region, the Netherlands. Depressive symptoms and anxiety were measured using the Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D, score >or=16) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale--Anxiety Subscale (HADS-A, score >or=8), respectively. Glucose metabolism status was determined by oral glucose tolerance test. In the total study population the prevalence of depressive symptoms and anxiety for the NGM, IGM and type 2 diabetes were 12.5, 12.2 and 21.0% (P = 0.004) and 15.0, 15.3 and 19.9% (p = 0.216), respectively. In men, the prevalence of depressive symptoms was 7.7, 9.5 and 19.6% (p<0.001), and in women 16.4, 15.8 and 22.6 (p = 0.318), for participants with NGM, IGM and type 2 diabetes, respectively. Anxiety was not associated with glucose metabolism when stratified for sex. Intergroup differences (NGM vs. IGM and IGM vs. type 2 diabetes) revealed that higher prevalences of depressive symptoms are mainly manifested in participants with type 2 diabetes, and not in participants with IGM. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms, but not anxiety are associated with glucose metabolism. This association is mainly determined by a higher prevalence of depressive symptoms in participants with type 2 diabetes and not in participants with IGM

Associations of Lifestyle Factors, Disease History and Awareness with Health-Related Quality of Life in a Thai Population

10.1371/journal.pone.0049921PLoS ONE711

Non-participation in population-based disease prevention programs in general practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The number of people with a chronic disease will strongly increase in the next decades. Therefore, prevention of disease becomes increasingly important. The aim of this systematic review was to identify factors that negatively influence participation in population-based disease prevention programs in General Practice and to establish whether the program type is related to non-participation levels.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review in Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, covering 2000 through July 6th 2012, to identify publications including information about characteristics of non-participants or reasons for non-participation in population-based disease prevention programs in General Practice.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 24 original studies met our criteria, seven of which focused on vaccination, eleven on screening aimed at early detection of disease, and six on screening aimed at identifying high risk of a disease, targeting a variety of diseases and conditions. Lack of personal relevance of the program, younger age, higher social deprivation and former non-participation were related to actual non-participation. No differences were found in non-participation levels or factors related to non-participation between the three program types. The large variation in non-participation levels within the program types may be partly due to differences in recruitment strategies, with more active, personalized strategies resulting in higher participation levels compared to an invitation letter.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There is still much to be gained by tailoring strategies to improve participation in those who are less likely to do so, namely younger individuals, those living in a deprived area and former non-participants. Participation may increase by applying more active recruitment strategies.</p

Methods Used in Economic Evaluations of Chronic Kidney Disease Testing — A Systematic Review

Background: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is high in general populations around the world. Targeted testing and screening for CKD are often conducted to help identify individuals that may benefit from treatment to ameliorate or prevent their disease progression. Aims: This systematic review examines the methods used in economic evaluations of testing and screening in CKD, with a particular focus on whether test accuracy has been considered, and how analysis has incorporated issues that may be important to the patient, such as the impact of testing on quality of life and the costs they incur. Methods: Articles that described model-based economic evaluations of patient testing interventions focused on CKD were identified through the searching of electronic databases and the hand searching of the bibliographies of the included studies. Results: The initial electronic searches identified 2,671 papers of which 21 were included in the final review. Eighteen studies focused on proteinuria, three evaluated glomerular filtration rate testing and one included both tests. The full impact of inaccurate test results was frequently not considered in economic evaluations in this setting as a societal perspective was rarely adopted. The impact of false positive tests on patients in terms of the costs incurred in re-attending for repeat testing, and the anxiety associated with a positive test was almost always overlooked. In one study where the impact of a false positive test on patient quality of life was examined in sensitivity analysis, it had a significant impact on the conclusions drawn from the model. Conclusion: Future economic evaluations of kidney function testing should examine testing and monitoring pathways from the perspective of patients, to ensure that issues that are important to patients, such as the possibility of inaccurate test results, are properly considered in the analysis

The role of therapeutic optimism in recruitment to a clinical trial in a peripartum setting: balancing hope and uncertainty

BACKGROUND: Hope has therapeutic value because it enables people to cope with uncertainty about their future health. Indeed, hope, or therapeutic optimism (TO), is seen as an essential aspect of the provision and experience of medical care. The role of TO in clinical research has been briefly discussed, but the concept, and whether it can be transferred from care to research and from patients to clinicians, has not been fully investigated. The role played by TO in research emerged during interviews with staff involved in a peripartum trial. This paper unpacks the concept of TO in this setting and considers the role it may play in the wider delivery of clinical trials. METHODS: The Got-it trial is a UK-based, randomised placebo-controlled trial that investigates the use of sublingual glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) spray to treat retained placenta. Qualitative data were collected in open-ended interviews with obstetricians, research and clinical midwives (n =27) involved in trial recruitment. Data were analysed using the method of constant comparison. RESULTS: TO influenced staff engagement with Got-it at different points in the trial and in different ways. Prior knowledge of, and familiarity with, GTN meant that from the outset staff perceived the trial as low risk. TO facilitated staff involvement in the trial; staff who already understood GTN's effects were optimistic that it would work, and staff collaborated because they hoped that the trial would address what they identified as an important clinical need. TO could fluctuate over the course of the trial, and was sustained or undermined by unofficial observation of clinical outcomes and speculations about treatment allocation. Thus, TO appeared to be influenced by key situational factors: prior knowledge and experience, clinical need and observed participant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Situational TO plays a role in facilitating staff engagement with clinical research. TO may affect trial recruitment by enabling staff to sustain the levels of uncertainty, or individual equipoise, necessary to collaborate with research while also responding to patients' clinical needs. Staff may benefit from training to deal with fluctuations in TO. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISCRTN88609453 . Registered on 26 March 2014

Acceptability of healthcare interventions : an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework

Abstract Background It is increasingly acknowledged that \u2018acceptability\u2019 should be considered when designing, evaluating and implementing healthcare interventions. However, the published literature offers little guidance on how to define or assess acceptability. The purpose of this study was to develop a multi-construct theoretical framework of acceptability of healthcare interventions that can be applied to assess prospective (i.e. anticipated) and retrospective (i.e. experienced) acceptability from the perspective of intervention delivers and recipients. Methods Two methods were used to select the component constructs of acceptability. 1) An overview of reviews was conducted to identify systematic reviews that claim to define, theorise or measure acceptability of healthcare interventions. 2) Principles of inductive and deductive reasoning were applied to theorise the concept of acceptability and develop a theoretical framework. Steps included (1) defining acceptability; (2) describing its properties and scope and (3) identifying component constructs and empirical indicators. Results From the 43 reviews included in the overview, none explicitly theorised or defined acceptability. Measures used to assess acceptability focused on behaviour (e.g. dropout rates) (23 reviews), affect (i.e. feelings) (5 reviews), cognition (i.e. perceptions) (7 reviews) or a combination of these (8 reviews). From the methods described above we propose a definition: Acceptability is a multi-faceted construct that reflects the extent to which people delivering or receiving a healthcare intervention consider it to be appropriate, based on anticipated or experienced cognitive and emotional responses to the intervention. The theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) consists of seven component constructs: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, and self-efficacy. Conclusion Despite frequent claims that healthcare interventions have assessed acceptability, it is evident that acceptability research could be more robust. The proposed definition of acceptability and the TFA can inform assessment tools and evaluations of the acceptability of new or existing interventions