Dataset Information

Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recruiting children to clinical trials is perceived to be challenging. To identify ways to optimise recruitment and its conduct, we compared how parents and practitioners described their experiences of recruitment to clinical trials.

Methods and findings

This qualitative study ran alongside four children's clinical trials in 11 UK research sites. It compared analyses of semi-structured interviews with analyses of audio-recordings of practitioner-family dialogue during trial recruitment discussions. Parents from 59 families were interviewed; 41 had participated in audio-recorded recruitment discussions. 31 practitioners were interviewed. Parents said little in the recruitment discussions contributing a median 16% of the total dialogue and asking a median of one question. Despite this, parents reported a positive experience of the trial approach describing a sense of comfort and safety. Even if they declined or if the discussion took place at a difficult time, parents understood the need to approach them and spoke of the value of research. Some parents viewed participation as an 'exciting' opportunity. By contrast, practitioners often worried that approaching families about research burdened families. Some practitioners implied that recruiting to clinical trials was something which they found aversive. Many were also concerned about the amount of information they had to provide and believed this overwhelmed families. Whilst some practitioners thought the trial information leaflets were of little use to families, parents reported that they used and valued the leaflets. However, both parties agreed that the leaflets were too long and wanted them to be more reader-friendly.

Conclusions

Parents were more positive about being approached to enter their child into a clinical trial than practitioners anticipated. The concerns of some practitioners, that parents would be overburdened, were unfounded. Educating practitioners about how families perceive clinical trials and providing them with 'moral' support in approaching families may benefit paediatric research and, ultimately, patients.

SUBMITTER: Shilling V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3134466 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners.

Shilling Valerie V Williamson Paula R PR Hickey Helen H Sowden Emma E Beresford Michael W MW Smyth Rosalind L RL Young Bridget B

PloS one 20110712 7

<h4>Background</h4>Recruiting children to clinical trials is perceived to be challenging. To identify ways to optimise recruitment and its conduct, we compared how parents and practitioners described their experiences of recruitment to clinical trials.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>This qualitative study ran alongside four children's clinical trials in 11 UK research sites. It compared analyses of semi-structured interviews with analyses of audio-recordings of practitioner-family dialogue during t ...[more]

PMID: 21765898

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore communication between clinicians and families of children undergoing heart surgery.DesignThis study was part of a larger study to select, define and measure the incidence of postoperative complications in children undergoing heart surgery. Parents of children recruited to a substudy between October 2015 and December 2017 were asked to complete a questionnaire about communication during their child's inpatient stay. We explored all responses and then disaggregated by the following patient characteristics: presence of a complication, length of stay, hospital site, ethnicity and child's age. This was a descriptive study only.SettingFour UK specialist hospitals.ResultsWe recruited 585 children to the substudy with 385 responses (response rate 66%).81% of parents reported that new members of staff always introduced themselves (18% sometimes, 1% no). Almost all parents said they were encouraged to be involved in decision-making, but often only to some extent (59% 'yes, definitely'; 37% 'to some extent'). Almost two-thirds of parents said they were told different things by different people which left them feeling confused (10% 'a lot'; 53% 'sometimes'). Two-thirds (66%) reported that staff were definitely aware of their child's medical history (31% 'to some extent'). 90% said the operation was definitely explained to them (9% 'to some extent') and 79% that they were definitely told what to do if they were worried after discharge (17% 'to some extent').Parents of children with a complication tended to give less positive responses for involvement in decision-making, consistent communication and staff awareness of their child's medical history. Parents whose children had longer stays in hospital tended to report lower levels of consistent communication and involvement in decision-making.ConclusionsOur results emphasise the need for consistent communication with families, particularly where complications arise or for children who have longer stays in the hospital.

Project description:The management of childhood asthma is often sub-optimal. Parents and other caregivers are primarily responsible for disease management and this responsibility includes communication with health professionals. The aim of this multi-perspective qualitative study was to explore the views of children, parents and health professionals to gain insight into the approach to clinical care in the management of childhood asthma. Interviews were held with nine parent-child (6-8 years) dyads, and 13 health professionals working in primary and secondary care. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three key themes emerged that were common to all data sets; (1) Child and parent awareness of symptoms; (2) Management and child wellbeing; and (3) Professional communication education and consultation with families. Although some children demonstrate good awareness of symptoms and appropriate use of medication, some parents expressed difficulty in identifying triggers and symptoms of asthma. Furthermore, parents lacked awareness regarding appropriate use of medication for preventing and managing symptoms of asthma. Health professionals believed that communication and education was lacking. Data from all participants suggested that consultations could be enhanced with greater emphasis on children's and parents' perceptions of asthma in the development of asthma management plans. CHILDHOOD ASTHMA:GUIDING FAMILIES THROUGH DISEASE MANAGEMENT: Both parents' and children's perceptions and understanding of childhood asthma should be considered when developing asthma management plans. The management of asthma is challenging and can result in poor disease outcomes if care is not taken. An individual's perception of their (or their child's) asthma can also affect the efficacy of treatment. Aidan Searle at the Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, UK, and co-workers, interviewed nine parent-child groups and thirteen health professionals to determine their perceptions of childhood asthma management in primary care. While some children had a strong awareness of symptoms and appropriate medication use, some parents found it difficult to identify asthma triggers and symptoms. Parents also displayed a lack of understanding of management through medication. Health professionals focused on the need for clearer information for families when guiding management of childhood asthma.

Project description:BackgroundThere is growing evidence for the use of social prescribing as a means to improve the mental health of patients. However, there are gaps in understanding the barriers and enablers faced by General Practitioners (GPs) when engaging in social prescribing for patients with mental health problems.MethodsThis study uses a qualitative approach involving one-to-one interviews with GPs from across the UK. The COM-B model was used to elucidate barriers and enablers, and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and a Behaviour Change Theory and Techniques tool was used to identify interventions that could address these.ResultsGPs recognised the utility of social prescribing in addressing the high levels of psychosocial need they saw in their patient population, and expressed the need to de-medicalise certain patient problems. GPs were driven by a desire to help patients, and so they benefited from regular positive feedback to reinforce the value of their social prescribing referrals. They also discussed the importance of developing more robust evidence on social prescribing, but acknowledged the challenges of conducting rigorous research in community settings. GPs lacked the capacity, and formal training, to effectively engage with community groups for patients with mental health problems. Link workers, when available to GPs, were of fundamental importance in bridging the gap between the GP and community. The formation of trusting relationships was crucial at different points of the social prescribing pathway, with patients needing to trust GPs in order for them to agree to see a link worker or attend a community activity, and GPs requiring a range of strong inter-personal skills in order to gain patients' trust and motivate them.ConclusionThis study elucidates the barriers and enablers to social prescribing for patients with mental health problems, from the perspectives of GPs. Recommended interventions include a more systematic feedback structure for GPs and more formal training around social prescribing and developing the relevant inter-personal skills. This study provides insight for GPs and other practice staff, commissioners, managers, providers and community groups, to help design and deliver future social prescribing services.

Project description:BackgroundBlinding is an established approach in clinical trials which aims to minimise the risk of performance and detection bias. There is little empirical evidence to guide UK clinical trials units (CTUs) about the practice of blinding statisticians. Guidelines recommend that statisticians remain blinded to allocation prior to the final analysis. As these guidelines are not based on empirical evidence, this study undertook a qualitative investigation relating to when and how statisticians should be blinded in clinical trials.MethodsData were collected through online focus groups with various stakeholders who work in the delivery and oversight of clinical trials. Recordings of the focus groups were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts.ResultsThirty-seven participants from 19 CTUs participated in one of six focus groups. Four main themes were identified, namely statistical models of work, factors affecting the decision to blind statisticians, benefits of blinding/not blinding statisticians and practicalities. Factors influencing the decision to blind the statistician included available resources, study design and types of intervention and outcomes and analysis. Although blinding of the statistician is perceived as a desirable mitigation against bias, there was uncertainty about the extent to which an unblinded statistician might impart bias. Instead, in most cases, the insight that the statistician offers was deemed more important to delivery of a trial than the risk of bias they may introduce if unblinded. Blinding of statisticians was only considered achievable with the appropriate resource and staffing, which were not always available. In many cases, a standard approach to blinding was therefore considered unrealistic and impractical; hence the need for a proportionate risk assessment approach identifying possible mitigations.ConclusionsThere was wide variation in practice between UK CTUs regarding the blinding of trial statisticians. A risk assessment approach would enable CTUs to identify risks associated with unblinded statisticians conducting the final analysis and alternative mitigation strategies. The findings of this study will be used to design guidance and a tool to support this risk assessment process.

Dataset Information

Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners.

Background

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets