Cargando…

Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions

BACKGROUND: Group interventions are interventions delivered to groups of people rather than to individuals and are used in healthcare for mental health recovery, behaviour change, peer support, self-management and/or health education. Evaluating group interventions in randomised controlled trials (R...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Biggs, Katie, Hind, Daniel, Gossage-Worrall, Rebecca, Sprange, Kirsty, White, David, Wright, Jessica, Chatters, Robin, Berry, Katherine, Papaioannou, Diana, Bradburn, Mike, Walters, Stephen J., Cooper, Cindy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6990578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31996259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3807-4
_version_ 1783492532083097600
author Biggs, Katie
Hind, Daniel
Gossage-Worrall, Rebecca
Sprange, Kirsty
White, David
Wright, Jessica
Chatters, Robin
Berry, Katherine
Papaioannou, Diana
Bradburn, Mike
Walters, Stephen J.
Cooper, Cindy
author_facet Biggs, Katie
Hind, Daniel
Gossage-Worrall, Rebecca
Sprange, Kirsty
White, David
Wright, Jessica
Chatters, Robin
Berry, Katherine
Papaioannou, Diana
Bradburn, Mike
Walters, Stephen J.
Cooper, Cindy
author_sort Biggs, Katie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Group interventions are interventions delivered to groups of people rather than to individuals and are used in healthcare for mental health recovery, behaviour change, peer support, self-management and/or health education. Evaluating group interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) presents trialists with a set of practical problems, which are not present in RCTs of one-to-one interventions and which may not be immediately obvious. METHODS: Case-based approach summarising Sheffield trials unit’s experience in the design and implementation of five group interventions. We reviewed participant recruitment and attrition, facilitator training and attrition, attendance at the group sessions, group size and fidelity aspects across five RCTs. RESULTS: Median recruitment across the five trials was 3.2 (range 1.7–21.0) participants per site per month. Group intervention trials involve a delay in starting the intervention for some participants, until sufficient numbers are available to start a group. There was no evidence that the timing of consent, relative to randomisation, affected post-randomisation attrition which was a matter of concern for all trial teams. Group facilitator attrition was common in studies where facilitators were employed by the health system rather than the by the grant holder and led to the early closure of one trial; research sites responded by training ‘back-up’ and new facilitators. Trials specified that participants had to attend a median of 62.5% (range 16.7%–80%) of sessions, in order to receive a ‘therapeutic dose’; a median of 76.7% (range 42.9%–97.8%) received a therapeutic dose. Across the five trials, 75.3% of all sessions went ahead without the pre-specified ideal group size. A variety of methods were used to assess the fidelity of group interventions at a group and individual level across the five trials. CONCLUSION: This is the first paper to provide an empirical basis for planning group intervention trials. Investigators should expect delays/difficulties in recruiting groups of the optimal size, plan for both facilitator and participant attrition, and consider how group attendance and group size affects treatment fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17993825 registered on 11/10/2016, ISRCTN28645428 registered on 11/04/2012, ISRCTN61215213 registered on 11/05/2011, ISRCTN67209155 registered on 22/03/2012, ISRCTN19447796 registered on 20/03/2014.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6990578
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69905782020-02-04 Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions Biggs, Katie Hind, Daniel Gossage-Worrall, Rebecca Sprange, Kirsty White, David Wright, Jessica Chatters, Robin Berry, Katherine Papaioannou, Diana Bradburn, Mike Walters, Stephen J. Cooper, Cindy Trials Research BACKGROUND: Group interventions are interventions delivered to groups of people rather than to individuals and are used in healthcare for mental health recovery, behaviour change, peer support, self-management and/or health education. Evaluating group interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) presents trialists with a set of practical problems, which are not present in RCTs of one-to-one interventions and which may not be immediately obvious. METHODS: Case-based approach summarising Sheffield trials unit’s experience in the design and implementation of five group interventions. We reviewed participant recruitment and attrition, facilitator training and attrition, attendance at the group sessions, group size and fidelity aspects across five RCTs. RESULTS: Median recruitment across the five trials was 3.2 (range 1.7–21.0) participants per site per month. Group intervention trials involve a delay in starting the intervention for some participants, until sufficient numbers are available to start a group. There was no evidence that the timing of consent, relative to randomisation, affected post-randomisation attrition which was a matter of concern for all trial teams. Group facilitator attrition was common in studies where facilitators were employed by the health system rather than the by the grant holder and led to the early closure of one trial; research sites responded by training ‘back-up’ and new facilitators. Trials specified that participants had to attend a median of 62.5% (range 16.7%–80%) of sessions, in order to receive a ‘therapeutic dose’; a median of 76.7% (range 42.9%–97.8%) received a therapeutic dose. Across the five trials, 75.3% of all sessions went ahead without the pre-specified ideal group size. A variety of methods were used to assess the fidelity of group interventions at a group and individual level across the five trials. CONCLUSION: This is the first paper to provide an empirical basis for planning group intervention trials. Investigators should expect delays/difficulties in recruiting groups of the optimal size, plan for both facilitator and participant attrition, and consider how group attendance and group size affects treatment fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17993825 registered on 11/10/2016, ISRCTN28645428 registered on 11/04/2012, ISRCTN61215213 registered on 11/05/2011, ISRCTN67209155 registered on 22/03/2012, ISRCTN19447796 registered on 20/03/2014. BioMed Central 2020-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6990578/ /pubmed/31996259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3807-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This 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 Research
Biggs, Katie
Hind, Daniel
Gossage-Worrall, Rebecca
Sprange, Kirsty
White, David
Wright, Jessica
Chatters, Robin
Berry, Katherine
Papaioannou, Diana
Bradburn, Mike
Walters, Stephen J.
Cooper, Cindy
Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title_full Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title_fullStr Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title_full_unstemmed Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title_short Challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
title_sort challenges in the design, planning and implementation of trials evaluating group interventions
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6990578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31996259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3807-4
work_keys_str_mv AT biggskatie challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT hinddaniel challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT gossageworrallrebecca challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT sprangekirsty challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT whitedavid challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT wrightjessica challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT chattersrobin challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT berrykatherine challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT papaioannoudiana challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT bradburnmike challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT waltersstephenj challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions
AT coopercindy challengesinthedesignplanningandimplementationoftrialsevaluatinggroupinterventions