Article

Patients' Attitudes and Preferences About Participation and Recruitment Strategies in Clinical Trials

Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Mayo Clinic Proceedings (Impact Factor: 5.81). 04/2009; 84(3):243-7. DOI: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)61141-5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess attitudes of patients about participation in clinical trials.
This is a self-report survey of 400 patients who underwent general medical evaluations between September and November 2006 at a tertiary care academic medical center in Rochester, MN. We measured knowledge of access to clinical trials, attitudes toward participation, recruitment preferences, and beliefs about research integrity.
Of 485 consecutive patients, 400 (82%) completed the survey. Previous participation in clinical trials was reported by 112 patients (28%). Most were unaware of online information about clinical trials (330 [82%]), were satisfied with their current knowledge (233 [58%]), expected their treating physician to inform them about current trials (304 [76%]), and showed equal interest in participating in conventional or complementary intervention trials (174 [44%]). Of the 400 respondents, 321 (80%) found it appropriate to be contacted by mail and 253 (63%) by telephone regarding study participation. Most patients (364 [91%]) wanted to be informed about research findings or else would not participate in future clinical trials (272 [68%]). The most frequently expected compensation was free parking (234 [58%]). Most thought that their safety (373 [93%]) and privacy (376 [94%]) would be guarded.
Patients are interested in participating in clinical trials but commonly lack adequate information. If patients received more information (through their treating physicians), enrollment might improve. This single-site study has limited generalizability. Future studies involving a diverse group of patients from a broader geographic distribution will help provide more definitive results.

1 Follower
 · 
100 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Throughout the world there are problems recruiting ethnic minority patients into cancer clinical trials. A major barrier to trial entry may be distrust of research and the medical system. This may be compounded by the regulatory framework governing research with an emphasis on written consent, closed questions and consent documentation, as well as fiscal issues. The Leicester UK experience is that trial accrual is better if British South Asian patients are approached by a senior doctor rather than someone of perceived lesser hierarchical status and a greater partnership between the hospital and General Practitioner may increase trial participation of this particular ethnic minority. In Los Angeles, USA, trial recruitment was improved by a greater utilisation of Hispanic staff and a Spanish language-based education programme. Involvement of community leaders is essential. While adhering to national, legal and ethnical standards, information sheets and consent, it helps if forms can be tailored towards the local ethnic minority population. Written translations are often of limited value in the recruitment of patients with no or limited knowledge of English. In some cultural settings, tape-recorded verbal consent (following approval presentations) may be an acceptable substitute for written consent, and appropriate legislative changes should be considered to facilitate this option. Approaches should be tailored to specific minority populations, taking consideration of their unique characteristics and with input from their community leadership.
    British Journal of Cancer 09/2012; 107(7):1017-21. DOI:10.1038/bjc.2012.240 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is growing interest in the provision of trial results to trial participants. However, there are a number of gaps in the research base relating to the closure of clinical trials and feedback of results to participants. The aim of this research was to explore the practice of feeding back trial results to trial participants and to identify best practice in this area. Postal questionnaires were sent to members of the UK National Cancer Research Institute Clinical Studies Groups (NCRI CSG) and to patients over the age of 18 years who completed trial treatment (located in one Cancer Network) during a 16-month period (April 07-July 08). 145 NCRI CSG member surveys and 81 patient questionnaires were returned. The vast majority of all respondents supported the idea of offering results to trial participants. However, NCRI members and trial participants differed in their opinions about the timing and method for the provision of results. The results provide an insight into the views of these groups in relation to desire for results and practical aspects of results feedback which should inform further investigations into trial management and the practice of feedback of trial results.
    European journal of oncology nursing: the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society 04/2011; 15(2):124-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ejon.2010.06.009 · 1.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cost-effective recruitment of older adult study participants is essential to geriatric research. Because this age group is particularly challenging to recruit, careful planning and ongoing evaluation is important for successful participant recruitment and retention. Experienced recruitment staff should be involved in a study from the earliest planning stages through the active recruitment phase to the last randomization or enrollment visit. A number of participant burdens are unique to the elderly population. Recruitment staff should be trained to understand and assist with the needs of older research volunteers. Addressing these unique participant burdens can ensure successful study participant recruitment and retention in ongoing and future longitudinal studies on aging.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 10/2010; 58 Suppl 2:S303-7. DOI:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02937.x · 4.22 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from