Cargando…

Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials

INTRODUCTION: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pechero, Guillermo, Pfaff, Branden, Rao, Mayank, Pogorzelski, David, McKay, Paula, Spicer, Ella, Howe, Andrea, Demyanovich, Haley K., Sietsema, Debra L., McTague, Michael F., Ramsey, Lolita, Holden, Martha, Rudnicki, Joshua, Wells, Jeff, Medeiros, Michelle, Slobogean, Gerard P., Sprague, Sheila, Wells, Jeffrey, Bhandari, Mohit, O'Toole, Robert V., D'Alleyrand, Jean-Claude, Eglseder, Andrew, Johnson, Aaron, Langhammer, Christopher, Lebrun, Christopher, Manson, Theodore, Nascone, Jason, Paryavi, Ebrahim, Pensy, Raymond, Pollak, Andrew, Sciadini, Marcus, Degani, Yasmin, O'Hara, Nathan N., Joseph, Katherine, Camara, Megan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8239736/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100787
_version_ 1783715106645868544
author Pechero, Guillermo
Pfaff, Branden
Rao, Mayank
Pogorzelski, David
McKay, Paula
Spicer, Ella
Howe, Andrea
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Sietsema, Debra L.
McTague, Michael F.
Ramsey, Lolita
Holden, Martha
Rudnicki, Joshua
Wells, Jeff
Medeiros, Michelle
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Wells, Jeffrey
Bhandari, Mohit
O'Toole, Robert V.
D'Alleyrand, Jean-Claude
Eglseder, Andrew
Johnson, Aaron
Langhammer, Christopher
Lebrun, Christopher
Manson, Theodore
Nascone, Jason
Paryavi, Ebrahim
Pensy, Raymond
Pollak, Andrew
Sciadini, Marcus
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Degani, Yasmin
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Howe, Andrea
O'Hara, Nathan N.
Joseph, Katherine
Rudnicki, Joshua
Camara, Megan
author_facet Pechero, Guillermo
Pfaff, Branden
Rao, Mayank
Pogorzelski, David
McKay, Paula
Spicer, Ella
Howe, Andrea
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Sietsema, Debra L.
McTague, Michael F.
Ramsey, Lolita
Holden, Martha
Rudnicki, Joshua
Wells, Jeff
Medeiros, Michelle
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Wells, Jeffrey
Bhandari, Mohit
O'Toole, Robert V.
D'Alleyrand, Jean-Claude
Eglseder, Andrew
Johnson, Aaron
Langhammer, Christopher
Lebrun, Christopher
Manson, Theodore
Nascone, Jason
Paryavi, Ebrahim
Pensy, Raymond
Pollak, Andrew
Sciadini, Marcus
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Degani, Yasmin
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Howe, Andrea
O'Hara, Nathan N.
Joseph, Katherine
Rudnicki, Joshua
Camara, Megan
author_sort Pechero, Guillermo
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent. METHODS: The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have. RESULTS: Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation. DISCUSSION: Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8239736
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82397362021-06-29 Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials Pechero, Guillermo Pfaff, Branden Rao, Mayank Pogorzelski, David McKay, Paula Spicer, Ella Howe, Andrea Demyanovich, Haley K. Sietsema, Debra L. McTague, Michael F. Ramsey, Lolita Holden, Martha Rudnicki, Joshua Wells, Jeff Medeiros, Michelle Slobogean, Gerard P. Sprague, Sheila Slobogean, Gerard P. Sprague, Sheila Wells, Jeffrey Bhandari, Mohit O'Toole, Robert V. D'Alleyrand, Jean-Claude Eglseder, Andrew Johnson, Aaron Langhammer, Christopher Lebrun, Christopher Manson, Theodore Nascone, Jason Paryavi, Ebrahim Pensy, Raymond Pollak, Andrew Sciadini, Marcus Slobogean, Gerard P. Degani, Yasmin Demyanovich, Haley K. Howe, Andrea O'Hara, Nathan N. Joseph, Katherine Rudnicki, Joshua Camara, Megan Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article INTRODUCTION: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent. METHODS: The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have. RESULTS: Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation. DISCUSSION: Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal. Elsevier 2021-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8239736/ /pubmed/34195467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100787 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Pechero, Guillermo
Pfaff, Branden
Rao, Mayank
Pogorzelski, David
McKay, Paula
Spicer, Ella
Howe, Andrea
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Sietsema, Debra L.
McTague, Michael F.
Ramsey, Lolita
Holden, Martha
Rudnicki, Joshua
Wells, Jeff
Medeiros, Michelle
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Sprague, Sheila
Wells, Jeffrey
Bhandari, Mohit
O'Toole, Robert V.
D'Alleyrand, Jean-Claude
Eglseder, Andrew
Johnson, Aaron
Langhammer, Christopher
Lebrun, Christopher
Manson, Theodore
Nascone, Jason
Paryavi, Ebrahim
Pensy, Raymond
Pollak, Andrew
Sciadini, Marcus
Slobogean, Gerard P.
Degani, Yasmin
Demyanovich, Haley K.
Howe, Andrea
O'Hara, Nathan N.
Joseph, Katherine
Rudnicki, Joshua
Camara, Megan
Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title_full Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title_fullStr Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title_full_unstemmed Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title_short Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials
title_sort implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: an example from the prep-it trials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8239736/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100787
work_keys_str_mv AT pecheroguillermo implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT pfaffbranden implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT raomayank implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT pogorzelskidavid implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT mckaypaula implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT spicerella implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT howeandrea implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT demyanovichhaleyk implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT sietsemadebral implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT mctaguemichaelf implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT ramseylolita implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT holdenmartha implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT rudnickijoshua implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT wellsjeff implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT medeirosmichelle implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT slobogeangerardp implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT spraguesheila implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT slobogeangerardp implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT spraguesheila implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT wellsjeffrey implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT bhandarimohit implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT otoolerobertv implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT dalleyrandjeanclaude implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT eglsederandrew implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT johnsonaaron implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT langhammerchristopher implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT lebrunchristopher implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT mansontheodore implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT nasconejason implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT paryaviebrahim implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT pensyraymond implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT pollakandrew implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT sciadinimarcus implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT slobogeangerardp implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT deganiyasmin implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT demyanovichhaleyk implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT howeandrea implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT oharanathann implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT josephkatherine implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT rudnickijoshua implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT camaramegan implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials
AT implementingstakeholderengagementtoexplorealternativemodelsofconsentanexamplefromtheprepittrials