Cargando…

Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention

BACKGROUND: Ensuring fidelity to complex interventions is a challenge when conducting pragmatic randomised controlled trials. We explore fidelity through a qualitative process evaluation, which was conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm cohort randomised controlled trial: the REFORM (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scantlebury, Arabella, Cockayne, Sarah, Fairhurst, Caroline, Rodgers, Sara, Torgerson, David, Hewitt, Catherine, Adamson, Joy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171824/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32317024
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04274-6
_version_ 1783524144367796224
author Scantlebury, Arabella
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Rodgers, Sara
Torgerson, David
Hewitt, Catherine
Adamson, Joy
author_facet Scantlebury, Arabella
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Rodgers, Sara
Torgerson, David
Hewitt, Catherine
Adamson, Joy
author_sort Scantlebury, Arabella
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Ensuring fidelity to complex interventions is a challenge when conducting pragmatic randomised controlled trials. We explore fidelity through a qualitative process evaluation, which was conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm cohort randomised controlled trial: the REFORM (Reducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention) trial. The paper aims, through a qualitative process evaluation, to explore some of the factors that may have affected the delivery of the REFORM intervention and highlight how project-specific fidelity can be assessed using a truly mixed-methods approach when informed by qualitative insights. DESIGN: Semi-structured qualitative interviews carried out as part of a process evaluation. Interviews were analysed thematically. SETTING: Seven NHS trusts in the UK and a University podiatry school in Ireland. Interviews were undertaken face-to-face or over the telephone. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one REFORM trial participants and 14 podiatrists who delivered the REFORM intervention. RESULTS: Factors affecting fidelity included: how similar the intervention was to routine practice; the challenges of delivering a multifaceted intervention to a heterogeneous older population; and practical issues with delivery such as time and training. Trial participants’ views of the intervention, whether falls prevention is a personal priority, their experience of being part of a trial and individual factors such as medical conditions may also have affected intervention fidelity. CONCLUSIONS: Our process evaluation highlighted factors that were perceived to have affected the fidelity of the REFORM intervention and in doing so demonstrates the importance of considering fidelity when designing and evaluating pragmatic trials. We propose a number of recommendations of how important project-specific insights from qualitative work can be incorporated into the design of fidelity measurement of future trials, which build on existing conceptual fidelity frameworks. In particular, we encourage adopting a mixed-methods approach whereby qualitative insights can be used to suggest ways to enhance quantitative data collection facilitating integration through hypothesis generation, hypothesis testing and seeking explanation for trial findings. This will provide a framework of enabling measures of fidelity to be incorporated into the understanding of trial results which has been relatively neglected by existing literature. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN68240461. Registered on 01/07/2011.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7171824
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71718242020-04-24 Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention Scantlebury, Arabella Cockayne, Sarah Fairhurst, Caroline Rodgers, Sara Torgerson, David Hewitt, Catherine Adamson, Joy Trials Research BACKGROUND: Ensuring fidelity to complex interventions is a challenge when conducting pragmatic randomised controlled trials. We explore fidelity through a qualitative process evaluation, which was conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm cohort randomised controlled trial: the REFORM (Reducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention) trial. The paper aims, through a qualitative process evaluation, to explore some of the factors that may have affected the delivery of the REFORM intervention and highlight how project-specific fidelity can be assessed using a truly mixed-methods approach when informed by qualitative insights. DESIGN: Semi-structured qualitative interviews carried out as part of a process evaluation. Interviews were analysed thematically. SETTING: Seven NHS trusts in the UK and a University podiatry school in Ireland. Interviews were undertaken face-to-face or over the telephone. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one REFORM trial participants and 14 podiatrists who delivered the REFORM intervention. RESULTS: Factors affecting fidelity included: how similar the intervention was to routine practice; the challenges of delivering a multifaceted intervention to a heterogeneous older population; and practical issues with delivery such as time and training. Trial participants’ views of the intervention, whether falls prevention is a personal priority, their experience of being part of a trial and individual factors such as medical conditions may also have affected intervention fidelity. CONCLUSIONS: Our process evaluation highlighted factors that were perceived to have affected the fidelity of the REFORM intervention and in doing so demonstrates the importance of considering fidelity when designing and evaluating pragmatic trials. We propose a number of recommendations of how important project-specific insights from qualitative work can be incorporated into the design of fidelity measurement of future trials, which build on existing conceptual fidelity frameworks. In particular, we encourage adopting a mixed-methods approach whereby qualitative insights can be used to suggest ways to enhance quantitative data collection facilitating integration through hypothesis generation, hypothesis testing and seeking explanation for trial findings. This will provide a framework of enabling measures of fidelity to be incorporated into the understanding of trial results which has been relatively neglected by existing literature. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN68240461. Registered on 01/07/2011. BioMed Central 2020-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7171824/ /pubmed/32317024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04274-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Scantlebury, Arabella
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Rodgers, Sara
Torgerson, David
Hewitt, Catherine
Adamson, Joy
Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title_full Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title_fullStr Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title_full_unstemmed Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title_short Qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
title_sort qualitative research to inform hypothesis testing for fidelity-based sub-group analysis in clinical trials: lessons learnt from the process evaluation of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171824/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32317024
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04274-6
work_keys_str_mv AT scantleburyarabella qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT cockaynesarah qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT fairhurstcaroline qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT rodgerssara qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT torgersondavid qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT hewittcatherine qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT adamsonjoy qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention
AT qualitativeresearchtoinformhypothesistestingforfidelitybasedsubgroupanalysisinclinicaltrialslessonslearntfromtheprocessevaluationofamultifacetedpodiatryinterventionforfallsprevention