Cargando…
Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial
BACKGROUND: Randomised trials play a vital role in underpinning evidence-based care. However, trials involving adults with impaired capacity to consent raise a number of ethical and methodological challenges, leading to the frequent exclusion of this group from trials. This includes challenges aroun...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9701035/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36434661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06887-5 |
_version_ | 1784839452612362240 |
---|---|
author | Shepherd, Victoria Wood, Fiona Gillies, Katie Martin, Adam O’Connell, Abby Hood, Kerenza |
author_facet | Shepherd, Victoria Wood, Fiona Gillies, Katie Martin, Adam O’Connell, Abby Hood, Kerenza |
author_sort | Shepherd, Victoria |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Randomised trials play a vital role in underpinning evidence-based care. However, trials involving adults with impaired capacity to consent raise a number of ethical and methodological challenges, leading to the frequent exclusion of this group from trials. This includes challenges around involving family members as alternative ‘proxy’ decision-makers. Family members are often given little information about their role as a consultee or legal representative. Some family members find making a decision about trial participation difficult and may experience an emotional and decisional burden as a result. Families have reported a need for greater support and guidance when making such decisions, leading to the development of a decision aid (‘Making decisions about research for others’) for family members acting as consultee/legal representative. The decision aid now requires evaluation to determine its effectiveness in supporting families to make more informed decisions. METHODS: This protocol describes a prospective, multi-centre, randomised-controlled Study Within a Trial (SWAT) to evaluate the effectiveness of the decision aid. The SWAT will initially be embedded in approximately five host trials. SWAT participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention (decision aid alongside standard information about the host trial provided to consultees/legal representatives) or control (standard information alone). The primary outcome is the quality of proxy consent decision, assessed by the Combined Scale for Proxy Informed Consent Decisions (CONCORD). The SWAT design is informed by previous qualitative research. Initial feasibility will be explored in one host trial, followed by the main SWAT. An embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation will enable the SWAT findings to be contextualised and identify factors likely to affect implementation. DISCUSSION: This SWAT will generate the first evidence for recruitment interventions for trials involving adults lacking capacity to consent and add to knowledge about the use of decision support interventions in trial participation decisions. The SWAT will be embedded in a range of trials, and the heterogenous nature of the host trials, settings and populations involved will enable the intervention to be evaluated in a wide range of contexts. However, a pragmatic and flexible approach to conducting the SWAT is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The SWAT is registered as SWAT #159 with the Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT repository (registered 09.08.2020). Each host trial will be registered on a clinical trials registry. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9701035 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97010352022-11-27 Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial Shepherd, Victoria Wood, Fiona Gillies, Katie Martin, Adam O’Connell, Abby Hood, Kerenza Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Randomised trials play a vital role in underpinning evidence-based care. However, trials involving adults with impaired capacity to consent raise a number of ethical and methodological challenges, leading to the frequent exclusion of this group from trials. This includes challenges around involving family members as alternative ‘proxy’ decision-makers. Family members are often given little information about their role as a consultee or legal representative. Some family members find making a decision about trial participation difficult and may experience an emotional and decisional burden as a result. Families have reported a need for greater support and guidance when making such decisions, leading to the development of a decision aid (‘Making decisions about research for others’) for family members acting as consultee/legal representative. The decision aid now requires evaluation to determine its effectiveness in supporting families to make more informed decisions. METHODS: This protocol describes a prospective, multi-centre, randomised-controlled Study Within a Trial (SWAT) to evaluate the effectiveness of the decision aid. The SWAT will initially be embedded in approximately five host trials. SWAT participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention (decision aid alongside standard information about the host trial provided to consultees/legal representatives) or control (standard information alone). The primary outcome is the quality of proxy consent decision, assessed by the Combined Scale for Proxy Informed Consent Decisions (CONCORD). The SWAT design is informed by previous qualitative research. Initial feasibility will be explored in one host trial, followed by the main SWAT. An embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation will enable the SWAT findings to be contextualised and identify factors likely to affect implementation. DISCUSSION: This SWAT will generate the first evidence for recruitment interventions for trials involving adults lacking capacity to consent and add to knowledge about the use of decision support interventions in trial participation decisions. The SWAT will be embedded in a range of trials, and the heterogenous nature of the host trials, settings and populations involved will enable the intervention to be evaluated in a wide range of contexts. However, a pragmatic and flexible approach to conducting the SWAT is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The SWAT is registered as SWAT #159 with the Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT repository (registered 09.08.2020). Each host trial will be registered on a clinical trials registry. BioMed Central 2022-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9701035/ /pubmed/36434661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06887-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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 | Study Protocol Shepherd, Victoria Wood, Fiona Gillies, Katie Martin, Adam O’Connell, Abby Hood, Kerenza Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title | Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title_full | Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title_fullStr | Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title_short | Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial |
title_sort | feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (consult): protocol for a randomised study within a trial |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9701035/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36434661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06887-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shepherdvictoria feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial AT woodfiona feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial AT gillieskatie feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial AT martinadam feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial AT oconnellabby feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial AT hoodkerenza feasibilityeffectivenessandcostsofadecisionsupportinterventionforconsulteesandlegalrepresentativesofadultslackingcapacitytoconsentconsultprotocolforarandomisedstudywithinatrial |