Recruiting Minorities Where They Receive Care: Institutional Barriers to Cancer Clinical Trials Recruitment in a Safety-Net Hospital

Department of Anthropology, History & Social Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
Contemporary clinical trials (Impact Factor: 1.94). 08/2009; 30(6):552-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2009.06.009
Source: PubMed


Most research on the barriers to recruitment of ethnic and racial minorities focuses on patient factors. The purpose of this exploratory case study was to examine how institutional factors impacted recruitment and enrollment in a public hospital clinic frequented by minority patients.
We used ethnographic methods (observations of patient-provider interactions and semi-structured interviews) to document and explain how a number of institutional barriers hindered trials enrollment in a public hospital outpatient breast cancer clinic.
We identified two categories of institutional barriers: (1) organizational climate, and (2) research specific resources. Organizational climate included qualities of the clinic and hospital such as the clinic structure (clinic hours, patient assignment method), the interdisciplinary care team, the lack of continuity of care, and competing provider priorities of clinical care, teaching, and research. Research specific resources included: staff, funds and institutional status to facilitate opening a range of trials; and linguistically and literacy-appropriate research resources.
Although we cannot determine from our qualitative data the relative impact of different kinds of barriers (e.g. patient, provider, institutional barriers), our data highlights the need to address the role of institutional barriers in efforts to improve minority recruitment to clinical trials. Recruiting participants in safety-net settings may be a reasonable strategy for increasing accrual of ethnic and racial minority patients to cancer clinical trials. However, our qualitative data suggest that while opening protocols for accrual at minority-serving institutions may signal nominal access to trials, achieving substantive access may require further steps to overcome substantial institutional barriers.

Download full-text


Available from: Galen Joseph, Apr 14, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Minorities suffer more frequently and more severely from many diseases than do non-Hispanic whites, and they often receive lower-quality care, which leads to poorer health outcomes. Given the diversity of the US population, comparative effectiveness research should capture the health outcomes of racial and ethnic minority groups and investigate whether disparities reflect variations in care or different responses to treatment. We recommend a number of measures to ensure that this research addresses the needs of minorities, including greater attention to subgroup analysis. We also recommend the increased recruitment of minorities for clinical trials, and such measures as using community health workers to translate research results in ways that will increase their relevance to minority patients.
    Health Affairs 10/2010; 29(11):2098-104. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0612 · 4.97 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Maternal minority status is a risk factor for iron deficiency in infancy and pregnancy. Because language and cultural differences may limit research participation, a prospective study examining iron deficiency included maternal minority status as an inclusionary criterion. Cognizant of potential barriers to recruitment, goals were to quantify eligible Latina enrollees and refusals, examine participation barriers, and devise possible solutions. Mothers and their full-term newborns were eligible if the women were anemic, diabetic during pregnancy, of minority and/or lower socioeconomic status, and/or delivered an infant outside the average weight range for gestational age. Self-reported ethnicity and reasons for participation refusal were documented. During the first 18 months, 255 mothers and their infants were enrolled. Based on inclusionary criteria and the percentage of minority women admitted to the birthing center in a year, we anticipated 25% minority enrollees, with 16.3% Latina. Although 27% minority enrollment was obtained, only 8% were Latina (P < 0.01). System barriers, researcher perception barriers, and participant perception barriers were encountered. Over the next 8 months, addressing these recruitment barriers improved Latina enrollment. Enrollment barriers are significant hurdles to overcome, but with increased understanding and effort, more successful inclusion of Latina families can be achieved.
    WMJ: official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin 02/2011; 110(1):26-31.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors reviewed changes in accrual to cancer clinical trials over the last 2 decades at their institution with a focus on minority participation after the implementation of a community clinical oncology program (CCOP) and an aggressive, education-orientated minority outreach program (MOP). Data on patient enrollment in clinical trials for the years 1988 to 2010 was obtained from the William Beaumont Hospital (WBH) Cancer Clinical Trials Office. The type and number of cancers diagnosed and treated during the same period were obtained from the WBH tumor registry data. The MOP was initiated in the fall of 2003 with a focus on culture-specific cancer education. With the development of the CCOP, clinical trials accrual increased significantly by 10-fold (P = .001). The primary service area for the CCOP consistently averaged an 85% to 90% Caucasian population. During the same period, the minority population for the service area remained stable between 8.8% and 10% and did not change significantly. From 1999 to 2004, the WBH tumor registry data demonstrated that minorities represented 8.6% of cancers registered, whereas the average yearly minority enrollment from 2002 to 2004 was 5.4%. After initiation of the MOP, minority accrual doubled to 11% by 2010 with stable minority demographics. The current findings support the importance of a CCOP in supporting the accrual of patients to national clinical trials and increasing access to state-of-the art research. These data also strongly support focusing additional energy and educational efforts on targeting minority representation in clinical trials. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 03/2011; 117(20):4764-71. DOI:10.1002/cncr.26094 · 4.89 Impact Factor
Show more