Cargando…
Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders
AIMS: The aim of the study was to identify actionable learning points from stakeholders in remote decentralised clinical trials (RDCTs) to inform their future design and conduct. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior managers, t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290051/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34296777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15003 |
_version_ | 1784748798573019136 |
---|---|
author | Coyle, Joanne Rogers, Amy Copland, Rachel De Paoli, Giorgia MacDonald, Thomas M. Mackenzie, Isla S. |
author_facet | Coyle, Joanne Rogers, Amy Copland, Rachel De Paoli, Giorgia MacDonald, Thomas M. Mackenzie, Isla S. |
author_sort | Coyle, Joanne |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: The aim of the study was to identify actionable learning points from stakeholders in remote decentralised clinical trials (RDCTs) to inform their future design and conduct. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior managers, trial managers, technology experts, principal investigators, clinical investigators, research scientists, research nurses, vendors, patient representatives and project assistants. The interview data were coded using a thematic approach, identifying similarities, differences and clustering to generate descriptive themes. Further refinement of themes was guided by empirical phenomenology, grounding explanation in the meanings that interviewees gave to their experiences. RESULTS: Forty‐eight stakeholders were interviewed. Actionable learning points were generated from the thematic analysis. Patient involvement and participant engagement were seen as critical to the success of RDCTs where in‐person contact is minimal or nonexistent. Involving patients in identifying the research question, creating recruitment materials, apps and websites, and providing ongoing feedback to trial participants were regarded as facilitating recruitment and engagement. Building strong relationships early with trial partners was thought to support RDCT conduct. Multiple modes of capturing information, including patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and routinely collected data, were felt to contribute to data completeness. However, RDCTs may transfer trial activity burden onto participants and remote‐working research staff, therefore additional support may be needed. CONCLUSION: RDCTs will continue to face challenges in implementing novel technologies. However, maximising patient and partner involvement, reducing participant and staff burden, and simplifying how participants and staff interact with the RDCT may facilitate their implementation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9290051 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92900512022-07-20 Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders Coyle, Joanne Rogers, Amy Copland, Rachel De Paoli, Giorgia MacDonald, Thomas M. Mackenzie, Isla S. Br J Clin Pharmacol Original Articles AIMS: The aim of the study was to identify actionable learning points from stakeholders in remote decentralised clinical trials (RDCTs) to inform their future design and conduct. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior managers, trial managers, technology experts, principal investigators, clinical investigators, research scientists, research nurses, vendors, patient representatives and project assistants. The interview data were coded using a thematic approach, identifying similarities, differences and clustering to generate descriptive themes. Further refinement of themes was guided by empirical phenomenology, grounding explanation in the meanings that interviewees gave to their experiences. RESULTS: Forty‐eight stakeholders were interviewed. Actionable learning points were generated from the thematic analysis. Patient involvement and participant engagement were seen as critical to the success of RDCTs where in‐person contact is minimal or nonexistent. Involving patients in identifying the research question, creating recruitment materials, apps and websites, and providing ongoing feedback to trial participants were regarded as facilitating recruitment and engagement. Building strong relationships early with trial partners was thought to support RDCT conduct. Multiple modes of capturing information, including patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and routinely collected data, were felt to contribute to data completeness. However, RDCTs may transfer trial activity burden onto participants and remote‐working research staff, therefore additional support may be needed. CONCLUSION: RDCTs will continue to face challenges in implementing novel technologies. However, maximising patient and partner involvement, reducing participant and staff burden, and simplifying how participants and staff interact with the RDCT may facilitate their implementation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-12 2022-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9290051/ /pubmed/34296777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15003 Text en © 2021 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Coyle, Joanne Rogers, Amy Copland, Rachel De Paoli, Giorgia MacDonald, Thomas M. Mackenzie, Isla S. Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title | Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title_full | Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title_fullStr | Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title_full_unstemmed | Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title_short | Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
title_sort | learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: a qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290051/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34296777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coylejoanne learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT rogersamy learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT coplandrachel learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT depaoligiorgia learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT macdonaldthomasm learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT mackenzieislas learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders AT learningfromremotedecentralisedclinicaltrialexperiencesaqualitativeanalysisofinterviewswithtrialpersonnelpatientrepresentativesandotherstakeholders |