Article

An assessment of willingness to participate in a randomized trial of arthroscopic knee surgery in patients with osteoarthritis

Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Contemporary Clinical Trials (Impact Factor: 1.99). 05/2005; 26(2):169-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2004.12.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Identifying barriers to recruitment into a randomized clinical trial can help researchers adjust recruitment strategies to maximize enrollment. To determine barriers to enrollment of patients in trials of knee osteoarthritis treatments, we recruited from three centers patients over age 45 who had both knee osteoarthritis and a meniscal tear. We described a hypothetical randomized trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus non-operative management and assessed patients' willingness to participate in such a trial. We elicited preferences for treatment along with information on age, sex, education level, race, work status, and pain. We examined the association between these factors and willingness to participate in the trial. Orthopedic surgeons identified 106 eligible osteoarthritis patients, of whom 12 could not be reached, 6 refused and 88 (83%) completed interviews. 63% were female, 55% were college graduates, 23% were non-white and mean age was 60+/-8. The mean WOMAC pain score was 56+/-23. 22% of patients stated that they were definitely willing to participate in the hypothetical trial, and 24% stated they were probably willing. Subjects lacking strong preferences for treatment stated a greater willingness to participate than those with strong preferences (36-14% definitely willing, chi(2) for trend, p=0.005). WOMAC pain score, age, education, work status and race were not associated with willingness to participate. Males were more likely than females to state a willingness to participate (39-11% definitely willing, p=0.005). Since OA affects females disproportionately, a better understanding of barriers to females' participation in trials may enhance future research on treatment of osteoarthritis. Effectively addressing a priori treatment preferences through patient education about the advantages and drawbacks of treatments may increase willingness to participate in trials.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Alisha Heather Creel, Sep 05, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
103 Views
 · 
130 Downloads
  • Source
    • "The influence of patients' preferences and perceptions of equipoise on compliance and willingness to participate is not well explored, and often based on hypothetical trials [8-10]. Even among participants who agree and understand both clinical equipoise and the process of randomisation, about 10–15% still have a preference for a particular treatment and hope to be randomised to that particular treatment arm [8,11]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective was to understand patients' views of treatment after acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, and their reasons for deciding to request surgery despite consenting to participate in a randomised controlled trial (to 'cross-over'). Thirty-four in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with young (aged 18-35), physically active individuals with ACL rupture who were participating in a RCT comparing training and surgical reconstruction with training only. 22/34 were randomised to training only but crossed over to surgery. Of these, 11 were interviewed before surgery, and 11 were interviewed at least 6 months after surgery. To provide additional information, 12 patients were interviewed before randomisation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the Framework approach. Strong preference for surgery was commonplace and many patients said that they joined the RCT in order to bypass waiting lists. Patients who chose to cross-over described training as time consuming, boring and as unable to provide sufficient results within a reasonable timeframe. Some said their injured knees had given-way; others experienced new knee traumas; and many described their lack of trust in their knee. Patients believed that surgery would provide joint stability. Despite the ostensible satisfaction with surgery, more detailed exploration showed mixed views. Participants in a trial of treatments for acute ACL injury express a variety of views and beliefs about those treatments, and trial participation happens in the absence of equipoise. Furthermore, opting for surgical reconstruction does not necessarily provide patients with satisfactory outcomes. Definition of successful outcome may require an individualised approach, incorporating patients' as well as surgeons' views before treatment decisions are made.
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 09/2009; 10(1):100. DOI:10.1186/1471-2474-10-100 · 1.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "While some studies report no association between recruitment rates and education [13] [14], other literature suggests that individuals with a lower level of education are less likely to participate in clinical trials [6,15–21]. As chronic diseases often disproportionately affect the elderly, the poor, and those with lower educational attainment, recruiting these populations for clinical trials in chronic diseases is important but may be particularly difficult [22]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Randomized controlled trials in patient education often have difficulty enrolling vulnerable populations-specifically, older, poorer, and less educated individuals. We undertook a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of an educational intervention for arthritis management, which included strategies to remove literacy-related barriers to participation. This paper reports on the multi-stage recruitment process and assesses whether refusal to participate was related to education, age, gender, working status, or insurance status. The recruitment protocol was designed to eliminate literacy-related barriers to participation. Patients were never asked to read or fill out forms. Interactions were oral, using everyday terms and short, clear sentences. Patients who declined during a screening call were considered Stage 1 Refusers. Patients who initially expressed interest but neither completed a baseline questionnaire nor provided consent were considered Stage 2 Refusers. Patients who consented were considered Enrollees. Age, gender, and insurance status were compared between Stage 1 Refusers and Enrollees. A second analysis compared these variables, plus educational attainment and working status, between Stage 2 Refusers, and Enrollees. Of 408 eligible patients, there were 193 (47.3%) Stage 1 Refusers, 81 (19.9%) Stage 2 Refusers and 134 (32.8%) Enrollees. A higher proportion of Stage 1 Refusers than Enrollees were > or = 65 years old (58% vs. 37%, p = .0003). Multivariate analysis, adjusting for gender and insurance status, confirmed the effect of older age on refusal (OR = 2.3 (1.4, 3.6)). There were no significant differences between Stage 2 Refusers and Enrollees. We found no evidence of refusal to participate due to educational attainment, working status, insurance status, or gender. Older patients were more likely to refuse participation at the first stage of recruitment. Researchers should continue efforts to increase participation among older patients, particularly when studies are designed to be generalized to an elderly population as is the case with arthritis research. Strategies used in this recruitment protocol designed to remove literacy-related barriers to recruitment may be responsible for the observation that subjects with lower education did not have a higher rate of refusal. Such strategies deserve further study.
    Patient Education and Counseling 08/2008; 73(2):280-5. DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2008.06.017 · 2.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) are becoming increasingly popular; however, little is understood about patients' motivational factors and reasons for choosing a particular procedure. This investigation explored patient choices and perceptions concerning LRYGB and LAGB. A survey was given to 120 consecutive patients who had undergone LRYGB or LAGB 3-24 months earlier. The survey was designed to ascertain why patients chose banding or bypass, and how they rated their surgical outcome. A total of 101 patients responded (84%): 22 had undergone LAGB, 79 LRYGB. The top reason for choosing LRYGB was greater expectation of weight loss, whereas LAGB was chosen for its lower risk. Overall, 21% (18/84) of the patients were willing to be involved in a prospective randomized study of bariatric procedure choice. Six of 19 (32%) patients who underwent LAGB, but only 12 of the 65 (18%) who underwent LRYGB stated that they would be willing to accept randomization between the operations. Patients expressed varied reasons for choosing their procedure, most related to weight loss or safety profiles. Patients undergoing LAGB would have predicted similar results with either procedure, whereas those undergoing LRYGB showed a trend toward greater overall satisfaction with their operations (p = 0.06) and would have predicted an inferior outcome with the other procedure. Although the overall percentage of patients willing to be randomized is not high, a busy bariatric practice could recruit sufficient numbers of willing patients to undergo a prospective randomized trial of LRYGB and LAGB.
    Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 01/2006; 2(1):6-10. DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2005.10.002 · 4.94 Impact Factor
Show more