Recruiting to surgical trials in the emergency setting: using a mixed methods study to understand clinician and patient perspectives

Author:

Twiddy Maureen1ORCID,Birtwistle Jacqueline2,Edmondson Amanda3,Croft Julie4,Gordon Kathryn4,Meads David2,Burke Dermot5ORCID,Griffiths Ben6,Rose Azmina7,Sagar Peter5,Stocken Deborah4,Brown Julia M B4,Harji Deena46ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Hull York Medical School, Institute of Clinical and Applied Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Hull , Hull , UK

2. Department of Palliative Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds , Leeds , UK

3. Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham , UK

4. Leeds Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds , Leeds , UK

5. Department of Colorectal Surgery, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust , Leeds , UK

6. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust , Manchester , UK

7. Patient and Public Involvement Representative for the LaCeS Trial

Abstract

Abstract Background Undertaking randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in emergency surgical settings is associated with methodological and practical challenges. This study explored patients’ and clinicians’ perspectives associated with the conduct of an RCT comparing laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the acute setting. Methods All eligible patients screened and enrolled for the ‘Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery in the acute setting (LaCeS)’ multicentre, randomized clinical feasibility trial in five UK NHS Trusts were invited to respond to a survey. Patients and healthcare professionals were also invited to take part in semi-structured interviews. Survey and interviews explored the acceptability of the feasibility trial. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic analysis. Survey data were analysed descriptively to assess patient views of the trial and intervention. Results Out of 72 patients enrolled for the LaCeS RCT, survey data were collected from 28 patients (38.9 per cent), and interviews were conducted with 16 patients and 14 healthcare professionals. Thirteen out of 28 patients (46 per cent) had treatment preferences but these were not strong enough to deter participation. Twelve of the patients interviewed believed that their surgeon preferred laparoscopic surgery, but this did not deter them from participating in the trial. Half of the surgeons interviewed expressed the view that laparoscopic surgery was of benefit in this setting, but recognized that the need for research evidence outweighed their personal treatment preferences. Eight of the 14 recruiters reported that the emergency setting affected recruitment, especially in centres with fewer recruiting surgeons. Interviewees reported that recruitment was helped significantly by using surgical trainees to consent patients. Conclusion This study identified specific challenges for the LaCeS trial design to address and adds significant insights to our understanding of recruiting to emergency surgical trials more broadly.

Funder

National Institute for Health

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3