scholarly journals Views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to a psychosocial randomised controlled trial: a qualitative study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Trefor Aspden ◽  
Megan Armstrong ◽  
Marc Serfaty
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Views Of Healthcare Professionals

Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials, and in particular those of psychosocial interventions, often fail to recruit to target, resulting in underpowered trials with poor generalisability of findings. The objectives of this study were to explore the views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to psychosocial research studies, and to explore their views on factors that may hinder or facilitate recruitment. Methods We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews, with healthcare professionals who had been involved in recruitment into a randomised controlled trial of a talking therapy for depression in patients with advanced cancer. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Results Five primary themes were identified, comprised of 11 subthemes. Attitudes towards research were largely positive. Health care professionals identified lack of time and narrow screening criteria as barriers to recruitment, and also noted the tendency to withhold participants from research for reasons other than eligibility (e.g., gatekeeping). The engagement of the study team with the clinical recruitment site, and the frequent presence of a researcher in clinics, were noted as facilitating recruitment. Conclusions Healthcare professionals involved in recruiting to trials of psychosocial interventions hold generally positive views of psychosocial research. However, they report that constraints including space and time limit their ability to recruit, and express anxieties about approaching patients for trial recruitment in the palliative phase of their illness. The findings from this study can inform how best to design trials, and in particular trials of psychosocial interventions, and train health care professionals for the study, to maximise recruitment.

scholarly journals Views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to a psychosocial randomised controlled trial: a qualitative study.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trefor Aspden ◽  
Megan Armstrong ◽  
Marc Serfaty
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Views Of Healthcare Professionals

Abstract Background: Randomised controlled trials, and in particular those of psychosocial interventions, often fail to recruit to target, resulting in underpowered trials with poor generalisability of findings. The objectives of this study were to explore the views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to psychosocial research studies, and to explore their views on factors that may hinder or facilitate recruitment. Methods: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews, with healthcare professionals who had been involved in recruitment into a randomised controlled trial of a talking therapy for depression in patients with advanced cancer. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Five primary themes were identified, comprised of 13 subthemes. Attitudes towards research were largely positive. Health care professionals identified lack of time and narrow screening criteria as barriers to recruitment, and also noted the tendency to withhold participants from research for reasons other than eligibility (e.g., gatekeeping). The engagement of the study team with the clinical recruitment site, and the frequent presence of a researcher in clinics, were noted as facilitating recruitment. Conclusions: Healthcare professionals involved in recruiting to trials of psychosocial interventions hold generally positive views of psychosocial research, but report that constraints limit their ability to recruit. The findings from this study can inform how best to design trials, and in particular trials of psychosocial interventions, and train health care professionals for the study, to maximise recruitment. Trial registration: Controlled Trials ISRCTN07622709, registered 15 July 2011

scholarly journals Views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to trials of psychosocial research: a qualitative study

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trefor Aspden ◽  
Megan Armstrong ◽  
Marc Serfaty
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Views Of Healthcare Professionals

Abstract Background: Randomised controlled trials, and in particular those of psychosocial interventions, often fail to recruit to target, resulting in underpowered trials with poor generalisability of findings. The objectives of this study was to explore the views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to psychosocial research studies, and to explore their views on factors that may hinder or facilitate recruitment. Methods: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews, with healthcare professionals who had been involved in recruitment into a randomised controlled trial of a talking therapy for depression in patients with advanced cancer. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Six primary themes were identified, comprised of 15 subthemes. Attitudes towards research were largely positive. Health care professionals identified lack of time and narrow screening criteria as barriers to recruitment, and also noted the tendency to withhold participants from research for reasons other than eligibility (e.g., gatekeeping). The engagement of the study team with the clinical recruitment site, and the frequent presence of a researcher in clinics, were noted as facilitating recruitment. Conclusions: Healthcare professionals involved in recruiting to trials of psychosocial interventions hold generally positive views of psychosocial research, but report that constraints limit their ability to recruit. The findings from this study can inform how best to design trials, and in particular trials of psychosocial interventions, and train health care professionals for the study, to maximise recruitment. Trial registration: Controlled Trials ISRCTN07622709, registered 15 July 2011

Habits-GDM mobile application in managing gestational diabetes in Singapore: A mixed-methods study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shilpa Surendran ◽  
Chang Siang Lim ◽  
Gerald Choon Huat Koh ◽  
Tong Wei Yew ◽  
E Shyong Tai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Perceived Usefulness ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Automatic Data ◽  
Glucose Testing ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BACKGROUND The prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing in Singapore and the cost of providing traditional care for GDM is high. Mobile health (mHealth) applications may act as useful tools in the management of GDM. OBJECTIVE The objective of this mixed-methods study was to measure the usage behaviour and explore users’ perceived usefulness of the Habits-GDM application when managing GDM in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS We conducted a quantitative analysis of the application usage behaviour in 170 Habits-GDM application users and 14 semi-structured interviews with users from a randomised controlled trial. RESULTS The convenience of automatic data transfer of weight values to the Habits-GDM application helped users (116/170, 68%) log their weight at least once a week. However, when the application had usability challenges, users avoided using that feature, i.e. users logged only an average of less than one meal/week out of the recommended six meals/week. Of the usability challenges, many users (12/14, 85.7%) mentioned food items not worded in the commonly known way and limited ethnic food database as the primary barriers. Only half of the users (84/170, 49.4%) accessed the educational lessons, but many (9/14, 64%) identified the provision of always available, valuable health-related information as an advantage of the educational lessons. ‘Healthy eating’ and ‘Why exercise’ were the most (56/84, 66.67%) and least (38/84, 45.24%) frequently accessed educational lessons, respectively. Users (10/14, 71.4%) reported sending messages to the coach via the chat interface only when they faced logistic issues and 86.45% of all the coach messages were replies typed by the research coordinator in response to the logistics issues (i.e. a request for blood glucose testing strips and appointment confirmation) raised by the users. Healthcare professionals lack of access to the coach’s dashboard discouraged users from asking queries related to GDM via the e-coaching feature. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest that mHealth application acts as a useful tool in managing GDM. Culturally sensitive mHealth applications with a provision for women to interact with healthcare professionals should be developed in cooperation with the users. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Wellbeing Intervention for Chronic Kidney Disease (WICKD): results of a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kylie M. Dingwall ◽  
Michelle Sweet ◽  
Alan Cass ◽  
Jaquelyne T. Hughes ◽  
David Kavanagh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Indigenous Australians ◽  
Treatment As Usual ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Hep B ◽  
Distress Scale

Abstract Background End stage kidney disease (ESKD) is associated with many losses, subsequently impacting mental wellbeing. Few studies have investigated the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for people with ESKD and none exist for Indigenous people, a population in which the ESKD burden is especially high. Methods This three-arm, waitlist, single-blind randomised controlled trial examined efficacy of the Stay Strong App in improving psychological distress (Kessler distress scale; K10), depressive symptoms (adapted Patient Health Questionnaire; PHQ-9), quality of life (EuroQoL; EQ. 5D) and dialysis adherence among Indigenous Australians undergoing haemodialysis in central and northern Australia (Alice Springs and Darwin), with follow up over two 3-month periods. Effects of immediate AIMhi Stay Strong App treatment were compared with those from a contact control app (The Hep B Story) and treatment as usual (TAU). Control conditions received the Stay Strong intervention after 3 months. Results Primary analyses of the full sample (N = 156) showed statistically significant decreases in K10 and PHQ-9 scores at 3 months for the Hep B Story but not for the Stay Strong app or TAU. Restricting the sample to those with moderate to severe symptoms of distress or depression (K10 > =25 or PHQ-9 > =10) showed significant decreases in K10 and PHQ-9 scores for both Stay Strong and Hep B Story. No significant differences were observed for the EQ-5D or dialysis attendance. Conclusions Findings suggest that talking to people about their wellbeing and providing information relevant to kidney health using culturally adapted, locally relevant apps improve the wellbeing of people on dialysis. Further research is required to replicate these findings and identify active intervention components. Trial registration ACTRN12617000249358; 17/02/2017.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document