Dataset Information

Parental perspectives long term after neonatal clinical trial participation: a survey.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Although recruiting newborns is ethically challenging, clinical trials remain essential to improve neonatal care. There is a lack of empirical data on the parental perspectives following participation of their neonate in a clinical trial, especially at long term. The objective of this study is to assess experiences and emotions of parents, long term after trial participation in an interventional drug trial. METHODS:Parents of former participants of five neonatal interventional drug trials were surveyed at long term (3-13?years ago) after participation. The survey assessed parental contentment with trial participation, perceived influence of the trial on care and health, emotional consequences of participation, and awareness of typical clinical trial characteristics on 6-point Likert scales. RESULTS:Complete responses were received from 123 parents (52% of involved families). Twenty percent of parents did not remember participation. Those who remembered participation reported high contentment with overall trial participation (median 5.00), but not with follow-up (median 3.00). Most parents did not perceive any influence of the trial on care (median 2.00) and health (median 2.43). Almost all parents reported satisfaction and pride (median 4.40), while a minority of parents reported anxiety and stress (median 1.44) or guilt (median 1.33) related to trial participation. A relevant minority was unaware of typical trial characteristics (median 4.20; 27% being unaware). CONCLUSIONS:Overall, parents reported positive experiences and little emotional distress long term after participation. Future efforts to improve the practice of neonatal clinical trials should focus on ensuring effective communication about the concept and characteristics of a clinical trial during consent discussions and on the follow-up after the trial.

SUBMITTER: Salaets T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7607657 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Parental perspectives long term after neonatal clinical trial participation: a survey.

Salaets Thomas T Lavrysen Emilie E Smits Anne A Vanhaesebrouck Sophie S Rayyan Maissa M Ortibus Els E Toelen Jaan J Claes Laurence L Allegaert Karel K

Trials 20201102 1

<h4>Background</h4>Although recruiting newborns is ethically challenging, clinical trials remain essential to improve neonatal care. There is a lack of empirical data on the parental perspectives following participation of their neonate in a clinical trial, especially at long term. The objective of this study is to assess experiences and emotions of parents, long term after trial participation in an interventional drug trial.<h4>Methods</h4>Parents of former participants of five neonatal interve ...[more]

PMID: 33138847

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundParents take neonates to the emergency department for many reasons, often nonurgent, pressuring an already burdened system. We aimed to characterize these visits and families to identify potential strategies to decrease neonatal emergency department visits.MethodsWe developed and implemented a survey that explored characteristics of neonates and parents/guardians evaluated in the emergency department, perspectives of parents and use of health care services. Parents presenting with a neonate to the emergency department in 5 large academic hospitals in Ontario were surveyed between December 2013 and June 2015. We used descriptive statistics to report survey data and explored correlations between factors.ResultsA total of 1533 surveys were completed. The most common reasons for presenting were jaundice (441 [28.8%]) and feeding issues (251 [16.4%]). The majority of respondents (73.9% [1104/1494]) had received advice before going to the emergency department. In most cases (86.4% [954/1104]), this was from a health care provider, who frequently advised going to the emergency department. Although most parents (86.8% [1280/1475]) reported high confidence in caring for a sick or injured child, 42.3% (643/1519) were unsure of the severity, and most (90.4% [578/639]) of these parents felt that the infant required assessment immediately or the same day. Of parents who felt the condition was not serious, 83.2% (198/238) thought that same-day evaluation was required. Nearly half of respondents (44.4% [621/1400]) said they would have gone to their health care provider with a same-day appointment, and 28.1% (344/1225) would have gone to their care provider with a next-day appointment.InterpretationParents' reported confidence in caring for sick or injured infants does not match the perceived urgency of neonatal conditions, which likely contributes to emergency department overuse. Any system to decrease nonurgent emergency department use by neonates would need to be immediately responsive, providing same-day help.

Project description:ImportanceIt remains poorly understood how parents decide whether to enroll a child in a neonatal clinical trial. This is particularly true for parents from racial or ethnic minority populations. Understanding factors associated with enrollment decisions may improve recruitment processes for families, increase enrollment rates, and decrease disparities in research participation.ObjectiveTo assess differences in parental factors between parents who enrolled their infant and those who declined enrollment for a neonatal randomized clinical trial.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study conducted from July 2017 to October 2019 in 12 US level 3 and 4 neonatal intensive care units included parents of infants who enrolled in the High-dose Erythropoietin for Asphyxia and Encephalopathy (HEAL) trial or who were eligible but declined enrollment. Data were analyzed October 2019 through July 2020.ExposureParental choice of enrollment in neonatal clinical trial.Main outcomes and measuresPercentages and odds ratios (ORs) of parent participation as categorized by demographic characteristics, self-assessment of child's medical condition, study comprehension, and trust in medical researchers. Survey questions were based on the hypothesis that parents who enrolled their infant in HEAL differ from those who declined enrollment across 4 categories: (1) infant characteristics and parental demographic characteristics, (2) perception of infant's illness, (3) study comprehension, and (4) trust in clinicians and researchers.ResultsOf a total 387 eligible parents, 269 (69.5%) completed the survey and were included in analysis. This included 183 of 242 (75.6%) of HEAL-enrolled and 86 of 145 (59.3%) of HEAL-declined parents. Parents who enrolled their infant had lower rates of Medicaid participation (74 [41.1%] vs 47 [55.3%]; P = .04) and higher rates of annual income greater than $55 000 (94 [52.8%] vs 30 [37.5%]; P = .03) compared with those who declined. Black parents had lower enrollment rates compared with White parents (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.73). Parents who reported their infant's medical condition as more serious had higher enrollment rates (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.0-16.3). Parents who enrolled their infant reported higher trust in medical researchers compared with parents who declined (mean [SD] difference, 5.3 [0.3-10.3]). There was no association between study comprehension and enrollment.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, the following factors were associated with neonatal clinical trial enrollment: demographic characteristics (ie, race/ethnicity, Medicaid status, and reported income), perception of illness, and trust in medical researchers. Future work to confirm these findings and explore the reasons behind them may lead to strategies for better engaging underrepresented groups in neonatal clinical research to reduce enrollment disparities.

Project description:BackgroundThe goal of newborn screening is early identification of babies with a high risk for disorders that may not be clinically evident at birth, but have severe consequences if untreated. New insight into inherited diseases and the ability to test for numerous diseases using new technique such as tandem mass spectrometry have made it practical to greatly expand the number of conditions tested. The expanded neonatal screening is now available and relatively simple, but this represents only a part of the picture. Positive results require follow-up confirmation. Most disorders screened require confirmatory biochemical or genetic tests and specialist visits. An efficient system is needed for managing the care of affected newborns. Expanded newborn screening is not yet available in all Regions of Italy, but discussions aimed at organizing universal access are underway. If these are successful, the role of the pediatrician as the primary contact with the parents is expected to become even more important.MethodsWe have conducted a survey of Italian pediatricians to assess their familiarity and opinions on newborn screening in general and on expanded newborn screening. All members of the Italian Association of Pediatricians (n = 9000) were invited to compile a 10-item questionnaire online.ResultsThe response rate was 10 %, corresponding to 605 of 6000 active members. Respondents were from all Regions of Italy, with the highest number of responses coming from Lombardy (138, 22.8 %), Campania and Puglia (n = 61; 10.1 %). Interestingly, expanded neonatal screening was not available in any of these Regions at the time of the survey. Regarding their understanding of neonatal screening in general, most respondents (n = 552; 91.1 %) considered that they had at least a sufficient level of knowledge; however, only 59.6 % thought they had sufficient knowledge of expanded newborn screening.ConclusionsSuccessful implementation of a universal expanded NBS program will require efficient procedures for follow-up, diagnosis and treatment to prevent morbidity and mortality of infants and to reduce the period of uncertainty for unaffected families. Pediatricians may need additional training to allow them to fulfill their tasks of coordinating this process while keeping families informed and reassured.

Project description:The US Food and Drug Administration adopted labeling for nicotine patches to allow use beyond the standard 8 weeks. This decision was based in part on data showing increased efficacy for 24 weeks of treatment. Few studies have examined whether the use of nicotine patches beyond 24 weeks provides additional therapeutic benefit.To compare 8 (standard), 24 (extended), and 52 (maintenance) weeks of nicotine patch treatment for promoting tobacco abstinence.We recruited 525 treatment-seeking smokers for a randomized clinical trial conducted from June 22, 2009, through April 15, 2014, through 2 universities.Smokers received 12 smoking cessation behavioral counseling sessions and were randomized to 8, 24, or 52 weeks of nicotine patch treatment.The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence, confirmed with breath levels of carbon monoxide at 6 and 12 months (intention to treat).At 24 weeks, 21.7% of participants in the standard treatment arm were abstinent, compared with 27.2% of participants in the extended and maintenance treatment arms (?(2)(1)?= 1.98; P =?.17). In a multivariate model controlled for covariates, participants in the extended and maintenance treatment arms reported significantly greater abstinence rates at 24 weeks compared with participants in the standard treatment arm (odds ratio [OR], 1.70 [95% CI, 1.03-2.81]; P =?.04), had a longer duration of abstinence until relapse (? = 21.30 [95% CI, 10.30-32.25]; P <?.001), reported smoking fewer cigarettes per day if not abstinent (mean [SD], 5.8 [5.3] vs 6.4 [5.1] cigarettes per day; ? = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.06-0.82]; P =?.02), and reported more abstinent days (mean [SD], 80.5 [38.1] vs 68.2 [43.7] days; OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.06-2.26]; P =?.02). At 52 weeks, participants in the maintenance treatment arm did not report significantly greater abstinence rates compared with participants in the standard and extended treatment arms (20.3% vs 23.8%; OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.69-1.98]; P =?.57). Similarly, we found no difference in week 52 abstinence rates between participants in the extended and standard treatment arms (26.0% vs 21.7%; OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 0.72-2.45]; P =?.36). Treatment duration was not associated with any adverse effects or adherence to the counseling regimen, but participants in the maintenance treatment arm reported lower adherence to the nicotine patch regimen compared with those in the standard and extended treatment arms (mean [SD], 3.94 [2.5], 4.61 [2.0], and 4.7 [2.4] patches/wk, respectively; F2,522 = 6.03; P =?.003).The findings support the safety of long-term use of nicotine patch treatment, although they do not support efficacy beyond 24 weeks of treatment in a broad group of smokers.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01047527.

Project description:IntroductionUnderstanding clinical trial experiences can illuminate opportunities to optimize trial design and management, with potential benefits for recruitment and retention. This study sought to better understand clinical trial participant experiences and attitudes within spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), and how the evolving treatment landscape and participant characteristics may predict attitudes.MethodsA survey was developed following a review of published literature and discussions with caregivers of SMA trial participants. This was distributed via email to known trial participants in Cure SMA's database, announcements in Cure SMA's newsletter, and emails to SMA clinical trial principal investigators.ResultsSeventy complete surveys reflecting unique clinical trial experiences were included in analysis. Responses revealed positive attitudes about clinical trial management overall. Top motivators for trial participation included clinical benefit, investigational drug access, and the opportunity to help others. Top concerns were safety, whether benefits would justify risks, and concerns about pain accompanying tests. The greatest stressors were fear of pain, adverse event concerns, and challenges managing medical complications of SMA. Top benefits of trial participation were hope for a better future, helping others, and relationships with the study team. In regression analysis, participant gender, age, and race all emerged as significant predictors (p < 0.05) of motivators, concerns, stressors, and benefits, as did respondent type, knowledge about SMA, distance to the trial site, and treatment era. Top recommendations for improving study management all related to receiving more information.ConclusionThis research provides new perspective on patient experiences in SMA clinical trials. It underscores the importance of information and efforts to anticipate and accommodate participant needs. These findings may inform study design and interactions with research participants. They may become especially important in supporting recruitment and retention as more treatment options become available.

Dataset Information

Parental perspectives long term after neonatal clinical trial participation: a survey.

Publications

Parental perspectives long term after neonatal clinical trial participation: a survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets