Dataset Information

Challenges in recruiting subjects to a pilot trial of patient-managed in-hospital insulin.

ABSTRACT: To examine the feasibility of implementing clinician-supported inpatient self-managed insulin to aid in the planning of a randomized clinical trial.We conducted a proof-of-concept interventional study of inpatients with diabetes mellitus who had hospital orders for basal-bolus or sliding scale insulin. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were offered the opportunity to manage their own basal-bolus insulin with support from a diabetes nurse practitioner. Over a three-month screening period, we conducted 361 screens in 336 patients, only eleven of whom met all inclusion criteria. None of these eleven eligible patients elected to enroll. The most common reason for refusal was lack of interest in self-managing insulin while acutely ill (36 %).Future studies of patient-managed in-hospital insulin should consider enrolling less acutely ill patients with longer anticipated lengths of stay.NCT02144441.

SUBMITTER: Acton EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4590692 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Challenges in recruiting subjects to a pilot trial of patient-managed in-hospital insulin.

Acton Emily K EK Leonard Charles E CE Schutta Mark H MH Cardillo Serena S Troxel Andrea B AB Trotta Rebecca R Hennessy Sean S

BMC research notes 20151001

<h4>Background</h4>To examine the feasibility of implementing clinician-supported inpatient self-managed insulin to aid in the planning of a randomized clinical trial.<h4>Results</h4>We conducted a proof-of-concept interventional study of inpatients with diabetes mellitus who had hospital orders for basal-bolus or sliding scale insulin. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were offered the opportunity to manage their own basal-bolus insulin with support from a diabetes nurse practitioner. Over a ...[more]

PMID: 26429339

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Hospitalizations for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are associated with increased mortality and decreased quality of life. Replicate hospital discharge studies were initiated to examine efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium HandiHaler® versus placebo, in addition to usual care, in patients discharged from the hospital after an AECOPD. Methods: Both studies were randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, with inclusion/exclusion criteria providing a diverse COPD patient cohort hospitalized for ?14 days with AECOPD. Patients received tiotropium or placebo, initiated within 10 days post-discharge. Target recruitment was 604 patients/study and planned duration was event-driven, ending after 631 clinical outcome events across both studies. Inability to reach targeted site numbers and patient recruitment/retention difficulties led to early study termination. Recruitment/retention challenges and protocol amendment impacts were assessed qualitatively to understand the major issues. Results: Over 18 months, 219 patients were enrolled; 158 were randomized and 61 failed screening. Premature treatment discontinuation occurred in 49(31%) patients, of whom 20(41%) completed health status follow-up. All-cause, 30-day hospital readmission was low (8[5%] patients). A total of 154(98%) patients had a concomitant diagnosis and most took pulmonary medication pre-randomization (143[91%]) and during study treatment (144[92%]). Inclusion/exclusion criteria changes failed to improve recruitment. Recruitment/retention barriers were identified, relating to patient and clinician factors, health care infrastructure, and clinical practices. Conclusions: Although AECOPD hospitalization is clinically important and incurs high costs, significant challenges exist in studying this population in clinical trials after hospitalization. Studies are needed to evaluate effective management of AECOPD patients at high risk of adverse clinical outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for demonstrating the efficacy of new therapies. However, issues of external validity often affect result application to real-world settings. Using registries to conduct RCTs is a reasonably new practice, but is appealing because it combines the benefits of both observational studies and RCTs. There is limited literature on patient motivators, barriers, and consent to registries for conducting RCTs. The purpose of our study was to establish the factors that motivate and/or inhibit patients from joining a registry for RCTs and to determine what information matters to patients when making an enrolment decision to participate in such a registry.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study at a dialysis centre in Southwest Ireland representing a catchment patient population of approximately 430,000. Quantitative data were coded and analysed in SPSS (v16). Descriptive statistics were produced, and open-ended questions were analysed by thematic analysis.ResultsEighty-seven patients completed the questionnaire. Reasons for participation in a registry included personal and altruistic benefits. Barriers to participation were time and travel requirements associated with registry participation, data safety concerns, risks, side effects, and concerns that registry participation would impact current treatment. Although 29.8% of patients expressed concern regarding their data being stored in a registry, 79.3% were still willing to consent to have their data uploaded and stored in a registry for conducting RCTs. It was important to patients to have their GP (general practitioner) involved in the decision to participate, despite little day-to-day contact with their GP for renal dialysis management.ConclusionChallenges to recruitment to registries for RCTs exist, but addressing the identified concerns of potential participants may aid patients in making a more informed enrolment decision and may improve recruitment to registries, and by extension, to RCTs conducted using the registry.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aimed to describe recruitment challenges encountered during a phase IIa study of vixotrigine, a state and use-dependent Nav1.7 channel blocker, in individuals with trigeminal neuralgia. METHODS:This was an international, multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study that included a 7-day run-in period, a 21-day open-label phase, and a 28-day double-blind phase in which patients (planned n =?30) were randomized to vixotrigine or placebo. Before recruitment, all antiepileptic drugs had to be stopped, except for gabapentin or pregabalin. After the trial, patients returned to their original medications. Patient recruitment was expanded beyond the original five planned (core) centers in order to meet target enrollment (total recruiting sites N =?25). Core sites contributed data related to patient identification for study participation (prescreening data). Data related to screening failures and study withdrawal were also analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS:Approximately half (322/636; 50.6%) of the patients who were prescreened at core sites were considered eligible for the study and 56/322 (17.4%) were screened. Of those considered eligible, 26/322 (8.1%) enrolled in the study and 6/322 (1.9%) completed the study. In total, 125 patients were screened across all study sites and 67/125 (53.6%) were enrolled. At prescreening, reasons for noneligibility varied by site and were most commonly diagnosis change (78/314; 24.8%), age?>?80?years (75/314; 23.9%), language/distance/mobility (61/314; 19.4%), and noncardiac medical problems (53/314; 16.9%). At screening, frequently cited reasons for noneligibility included failure based on electrocardiogram, insufficient pain, and diagnosis change. CONCLUSIONS:Factors contributing to recruitment challenges encountered in this study included diagnosis changes, anxiety over treatment changes, and issues relating to distance, language, and mobility. Wherever possible, future studies should be designed to address these challenges. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01540630 . EudraCT, 2010-023963-16. 07 Aug 2015.

Dataset Information

Challenges in recruiting subjects to a pilot trial of patient-managed in-hospital insulin.

Publications

Challenges in recruiting subjects to a pilot trial of patient-managed in-hospital insulin.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets