Cargando…

Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders

BACKGROUND: Pragmatic cluster randomized trials (CRTs) offer an opportunity to improve health care by answering important questions about the comparative effectiveness of treatments using a trial design that can be embedded in routine care. There is a lack of empirical research that addresses ethica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nicholls, Stuart G., Carroll, Kelly, Weijer, Charles, Goldstein, Cory E., Brehaut, Jamie, Sood, Manish M., Al-Jaishi, Ahmed, Basile, Erika, Grimshaw, Jeremy M., Garg, Amit X., Taljaard, Monica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194212
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2054358120964119
_version_ 1783602388235452416
author Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Weijer, Charles
Goldstein, Cory E.
Brehaut, Jamie
Sood, Manish M.
Al-Jaishi, Ahmed
Basile, Erika
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Garg, Amit X.
Taljaard, Monica
author_facet Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Weijer, Charles
Goldstein, Cory E.
Brehaut, Jamie
Sood, Manish M.
Al-Jaishi, Ahmed
Basile, Erika
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Garg, Amit X.
Taljaard, Monica
author_sort Nicholls, Stuart G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pragmatic cluster randomized trials (CRTs) offer an opportunity to improve health care by answering important questions about the comparative effectiveness of treatments using a trial design that can be embedded in routine care. There is a lack of empirical research that addresses ethical issues generated by pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. OBJECTIVE: To identify stakeholder perceptions of ethical issues in pragmatic CRTs conducted in hemodialysis. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: In-person or telephone interviews with an international group of stakeholders. PARTICIPANTS: Stakeholders (clinical investigators, methodologists, ethicists and research ethics committee members, and other knowledge users) who had been involved in the design or conduct of a pragmatic individual patient or cluster randomized trial in hemodialysis, or their role would require them to review and evaluate pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in-person or over the telephone and were audio-recorded with consent. Recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim prior to analysis. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Sixteen interviews were conducted with 19 individuals. Interviewees were largely drawn from North America (84%) and were predominantly clinical investigators (42%). Six themes were identified in which pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis raise ethical issues: (1) patients treated with hemodialysis as a vulnerable population, (2) appropriate approaches to informed consent, (3) research burdens, (4) roles and responsibilities of gatekeepers, (5) inequities in access to research, and (6) advocacy for patient-centered research and outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Participants were largely from North America and did not include research staff, who may have differing perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: The six themes reflect concerns relating to individual rights, but also the need to consider population-level issues. To date, concerns regarding inequity of access to research and the need for patient-centered research have received less coverage than other, well-known, issues such as consent. Pragmatic CRTs offer a potential approach to address equity concerns and we suggest future ethical analyses and guidance for pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis embed equity considerations within them. We further note the potential for the co-creation of health data infrastructure with patients which would aid care but also facilitate patient-centered research. These present results will inform planned future guidance in relation to the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration is not applicable as this is a qualitative study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7597560
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75975602020-11-12 Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Weijer, Charles Goldstein, Cory E. Brehaut, Jamie Sood, Manish M. Al-Jaishi, Ahmed Basile, Erika Grimshaw, Jeremy M. Garg, Amit X. Taljaard, Monica Can J Kidney Health Dis Original Clinical Research Qualitative BACKGROUND: Pragmatic cluster randomized trials (CRTs) offer an opportunity to improve health care by answering important questions about the comparative effectiveness of treatments using a trial design that can be embedded in routine care. There is a lack of empirical research that addresses ethical issues generated by pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. OBJECTIVE: To identify stakeholder perceptions of ethical issues in pragmatic CRTs conducted in hemodialysis. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: In-person or telephone interviews with an international group of stakeholders. PARTICIPANTS: Stakeholders (clinical investigators, methodologists, ethicists and research ethics committee members, and other knowledge users) who had been involved in the design or conduct of a pragmatic individual patient or cluster randomized trial in hemodialysis, or their role would require them to review and evaluate pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in-person or over the telephone and were audio-recorded with consent. Recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim prior to analysis. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Sixteen interviews were conducted with 19 individuals. Interviewees were largely drawn from North America (84%) and were predominantly clinical investigators (42%). Six themes were identified in which pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis raise ethical issues: (1) patients treated with hemodialysis as a vulnerable population, (2) appropriate approaches to informed consent, (3) research burdens, (4) roles and responsibilities of gatekeepers, (5) inequities in access to research, and (6) advocacy for patient-centered research and outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Participants were largely from North America and did not include research staff, who may have differing perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: The six themes reflect concerns relating to individual rights, but also the need to consider population-level issues. To date, concerns regarding inequity of access to research and the need for patient-centered research have received less coverage than other, well-known, issues such as consent. Pragmatic CRTs offer a potential approach to address equity concerns and we suggest future ethical analyses and guidance for pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis embed equity considerations within them. We further note the potential for the co-creation of health data infrastructure with patients which would aid care but also facilitate patient-centered research. These present results will inform planned future guidance in relation to the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic CRTs in hemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration is not applicable as this is a qualitative study. SAGE Publications 2020-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7597560/ /pubmed/33194212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2054358120964119 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Clinical Research Qualitative
Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Weijer, Charles
Goldstein, Cory E.
Brehaut, Jamie
Sood, Manish M.
Al-Jaishi, Ahmed
Basile, Erika
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Garg, Amit X.
Taljaard, Monica
Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title_full Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title_fullStr Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title_full_unstemmed Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title_short Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials in Hemodialysis Care: An Interview Study With Key Stakeholders
title_sort ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic cluster randomized trials in hemodialysis care: an interview study with key stakeholders
topic Original Clinical Research Qualitative
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194212
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2054358120964119
work_keys_str_mv AT nichollsstuartg ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT carrollkelly ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT weijercharles ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT goldsteincorye ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT brehautjamie ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT soodmanishm ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT aljaishiahmed ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT basileerika ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT grimshawjeremym ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT gargamitx ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders
AT taljaardmonica ethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmaticclusterrandomizedtrialsinhemodialysiscareaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders