Cargando…

Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence pertaining to the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes in intervention evaluation trials is inconsistent. The inconsistency can be explained by the method used for allocating treatment and measuring preferences. The current methodolog...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sidani, Souraya, Fox, Mary, Streiner, David L., Miranda, Joyal, Fredericks, Suzanne, Epstein, Dana R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4640378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26557787
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-015-0108-4
_version_ 1782400062868946944
author Sidani, Souraya
Fox, Mary
Streiner, David L.
Miranda, Joyal
Fredericks, Suzanne
Epstein, Dana R.
author_facet Sidani, Souraya
Fox, Mary
Streiner, David L.
Miranda, Joyal
Fredericks, Suzanne
Epstein, Dana R.
author_sort Sidani, Souraya
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence pertaining to the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes in intervention evaluation trials is inconsistent. The inconsistency can be explained by the method used for allocating treatment and measuring preferences. The current methodological study is designed to address these factors by implementing the two-stage partially randomized or preference trial design, and administering a validated measure to assess participants’ preferences for the treatments under evaluation. It aims to compare attrition, adherence and outcomes for participants allocated randomly or by preference to treatment. The study is in its final stages of data collection; its protocol is presented in this paper. METHODS/DESIGN: A partially randomized clinical or preference trial is used. Eligible participants are randomized to two trial arms. First is the random arm involving random assignment to treatments, and second is the preference arm involving allocation to the chosen treatment. Participants with chronic insomnia are targeted. Two behavioral treatments are offered, stimulus control therapy and sleep restriction therapy, in the same format (small group) and dose (two sessions given over a 4-week period). A participant log is used to collect data on attrition. Adherence is evaluated in terms of exposure and enactment of treatment. Sleep-related outcomes (sleep parameters and perceived insomnia severity) are measured at pretest, posttest, 6 and 12 month follow-up. Treatment preferences, adherence and outcomes are assessed with reliable and valid measures. DISCUSSION: The advantages and limitations of the preference trial design are highlighted. The challenges in implementing the trial are discussed relative to the distribution of participants in the groups defined by treatment received and method of treatment allocation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry NCT02513017
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4640378
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46403782015-11-11 Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial Sidani, Souraya Fox, Mary Streiner, David L. Miranda, Joyal Fredericks, Suzanne Epstein, Dana R. BMC Nurs Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence pertaining to the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes in intervention evaluation trials is inconsistent. The inconsistency can be explained by the method used for allocating treatment and measuring preferences. The current methodological study is designed to address these factors by implementing the two-stage partially randomized or preference trial design, and administering a validated measure to assess participants’ preferences for the treatments under evaluation. It aims to compare attrition, adherence and outcomes for participants allocated randomly or by preference to treatment. The study is in its final stages of data collection; its protocol is presented in this paper. METHODS/DESIGN: A partially randomized clinical or preference trial is used. Eligible participants are randomized to two trial arms. First is the random arm involving random assignment to treatments, and second is the preference arm involving allocation to the chosen treatment. Participants with chronic insomnia are targeted. Two behavioral treatments are offered, stimulus control therapy and sleep restriction therapy, in the same format (small group) and dose (two sessions given over a 4-week period). A participant log is used to collect data on attrition. Adherence is evaluated in terms of exposure and enactment of treatment. Sleep-related outcomes (sleep parameters and perceived insomnia severity) are measured at pretest, posttest, 6 and 12 month follow-up. Treatment preferences, adherence and outcomes are assessed with reliable and valid measures. DISCUSSION: The advantages and limitations of the preference trial design are highlighted. The challenges in implementing the trial are discussed relative to the distribution of participants in the groups defined by treatment received and method of treatment allocation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry NCT02513017 BioMed Central 2015-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4640378/ /pubmed/26557787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-015-0108-4 Text en © Sidani et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Sidani, Souraya
Fox, Mary
Streiner, David L.
Miranda, Joyal
Fredericks, Suzanne
Epstein, Dana R.
Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title_full Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title_fullStr Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title_full_unstemmed Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title_short Examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
title_sort examining the influence of treatment preferences on attrition, adherence and outcomes: a protocol for a two-stage partially randomized trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4640378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26557787
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-015-0108-4
work_keys_str_mv AT sidanisouraya examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial
AT foxmary examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial
AT streinerdavidl examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial
AT mirandajoyal examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial
AT frederickssuzanne examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial
AT epsteindanar examiningtheinfluenceoftreatmentpreferencesonattritionadherenceandoutcomesaprotocolforatwostagepartiallyrandomizedtrial