Dataset Information

Incorporating parent, former patient and clinician perspectives in the design of a national UK double-cluster, randomised controlled trial addressing uncertainties in preterm nutrition.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Comparative effectiveness randomised controlled trials are powerful tools to resolve uncertainties in existing treatments and care processes. We sought parent and patient perspectives on the design of a planned national, double-cluster randomised controlled trial (COLLABORATE) to resolve two longstanding uncertainties in preterm nutrition.

Methods

We used qualitative focus groups and interviews with parents, former patients and clinicians. We followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist and conducted framework analysis, a specific methodology within thematic analysis.

Results

We identified support for the trial's methodology and vision, and elicited themes illustrating parents' emotional needs in relation to clinical research. These were: relieving the pressure on mothers to breastfeed; opt-out consent as reducing parent stress; the desire for research to be a partnership between clinicians, parents and researchers; the value of presenting trial information in a collaborative tone; and in a format that allows assimilation by parents at their own pace. We identified anxiety and cognitive dissonance among some clinicians in which they recognised the uncertainties that justify the trial but felt unable to participate because of their strongly held views.

Conclusions

The early involvement of parents and former patients identified the centrality of parents' emotional needs in the design of comparative effectiveness research. These insights have been incorporated into trial enrolment processes and information provided to participants. Specific outputs were a two-sided leaflet providing very brief as well as more detailed information, and use of language that parents perceive as inclusive and participatory. Further work is warranted to support clinicians to address personal biases that inhibit trial participation.

SUBMITTER: Lammons W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8208018 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceParents of children with cancer value strong therapeutic relationships with oncology clinicians, but not every relationship is positive.ObjectiveTo identify the prevalence of challenging parent-clinician relationships in pediatric oncology and factors associated with these challenges from parent and clinician perspectives.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey was conducted among parents and oncology clinicians of children with cancer within 3 months of diagnosis from November 2015 to July 2019 at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Boston Children's Hospital and Texas Children's Hospital. Participants were 400 parents of children with cancer and 80 clinicians (ie, oncology physicians and nurse practitioners). Parents completed surveys about relationships with 1 to 2 primary oncology clinicians; clinicians completed surveys about relationships with parents. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to August 2021.ExposuresAt least 3 previous clinical visits between parent and clinician.Main outcomes and measuresThe Relationship Challenges Scale Parent Version and Clinician Version were developed and used to measure threats to the therapeutic alliance. For the Relationship Challenges Scale-Parent version, relationships were considered challenging if a parent responded to any single question in the 2 lowest of 4 possible categories. For the Relationship Challenges Scale-Clinician version, challenges were considered to be present if a clinician reported responses in the 3 lowest of 6 possible response categories to any question.ResultsAmong 400 parents, there were 298 [74.5%] women, 25 Asian individuals (6.3%), 28 Black individuals (7.0%), 97 Hispanic individuals (24.3%), 223 White individuals (55.8%), and 10 individuals (2.4%) with other race or ethnicity; race and ethnicity data were missing for 17 (4.3%) individuals. Among 80 clinicians, there were 57 (71.3%) women, 38 attending physicians (47.5%), 32 fellows (40.0%), and 10 nurse practitioners (12.5%). Parents identified 676 unique relationships with clinicians, and clinician reports were available for 338 relationships. Among 338 relationships with paired parent and clinician surveys, 81 relationships (24.0%) were considered challenging by parents, 127 relationships (37.6%) were considered challenging by clinicians, and 33 relationships (9.8%) were considered challenging by parent and clinician. Parents with Asian or other race or ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] vs White parents, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.59-8.26) or who had lower educational attainment (OR for ≤high school vs >high school, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.56-5.90) were more likely to experience relationships as challenging. Clinicians used a variety of strategies more frequently in 127 relationships in which they perceived challenges vs 211 relationships in which they did not perceive challenges, such as holding regular family meetings (22 relationships [17.3%] vs 13 relationships [6.2%]; P = .009) and offering extra time and attention (66 relationships [52%] vs 60 relationships [28.4%]; P < .001). However, these strategies were not used with increased frequency when parents experienced relationships as challenging vs when parents did not experience this.Conclusions and relevanceThis survey study found that nearly one-quarter of parents of children with cancer reported challenges in the therapeutic relationship with their oncologist and that clinicians used strategies to improve relationships more frequently when they experienced the relationship as challenging. These findings suggest that new strategies are needed to improve experiences for parents and to help clinicians recognize and attend to parents whose experiences are suboptimal.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To explore communication and interaction between parents and clinicians following neonatal ultrasound (US) and MRI of the brain of babies born preterm. SETTING:This qualitative study was undertaken as part of a larger UK study of neonatal brain imaging. 511 infants were cared for in 14 London neonatal units with MR and cerebral US imaging in a specialist centre. PARTICIPANTS:Parents with infants born at <33?weeks gestation were randomised to receive prognostic information based on either MRI or US findings on their infants at term-corrected age. METHODS:Discussions between parents and clinicians about the MRI or US result were audio recorded. Parents were told about the findings and their baby's predicted outcome. A topic guide ensured essential aspects were covered. Recordings were fully transcribed. Discussion of the scan results, the content and style of the interaction and parental response were analysed qualitatively in 36 recordings using NVivo V.10. OUTCOMES:Key themes and subthemes were identified in the clinician-parent discussions. RESULTS:The overarching theme of 'the communication interface' was identified with three key themes: 'giving information', 'managing the conversation' and 'getting it right' and further subthemes. A range of approaches were used to facilitate parental understanding and engagement. There were differences in the exchanges when information about an abnormal scan was given. The overall structure of the discussions was largely similar, though the language used varied. In all of the discussions, the clinicians talked more than the parents. CONCLUSIONS:The discussions represent a difficult situation in which the challenge is to give and receive complex prognostic information in the context of considerable uncertainty. The study highlights the importance of being able to re-visit specific issues and any potential areas of misunderstanding, of making time to talk to parents appreciating their perspective and level of knowledge. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:EudraCT 2009-013888-19; Pre-results.

Project description:To explore how representatives from organisations with responsibility for doctors in training perceive risks to the educational progression of UK medical graduates from black and minority ethnic groups (BME UKGs), and graduates of non-UK medical schools (international medical graduates (IMGs)). To identify the barriers to and facilitators of change.Qualitative semistructured individual and group interview study.Postgraduate medical education in the UK.Individuals with roles in examinations and/or curriculum design from UK medical Royal Colleges. Employees of NHS Employers.Representatives from 11 medical Royal Colleges (n=29) and NHS Employers (n=2) took part (55% medically qualified, 61% male, 71% white British/Irish, 23% Asian/Asian British, 6% missing ethnicity). Risks were perceived as significant, although more so for IMGs than for BME UKGs. Participants based significance ratings on evidence obtained largely through personal experience. A lack of evidence led to downgrading of significance. Participants were pessimistic about effecting change, two main barriers being sensitivities around race and the isolation of interventions. Participants felt that organisations should acknowledge problems, but felt concerned about being transparent without a solution; and talking about race with trainees was felt to be difficult. Participants mentioned 63 schemes aiming to address differential attainment, but these were typically local or specialty-specific, were not aimed at BME UKGs and were largely unevaluated. Participants felt that national change was needed, but only felt empowered to effect change locally or within their specialty.Representatives from organisations responsible for training doctors perceived the risks faced by BME UKGs and IMGs as significant but difficult to change. Strategies to help organisations address these risks include: increased openness to discussing race (including ethnic differences in attainment among UKGs); better sharing of information and resources nationally to empower organisations to effect change locally and within specialties; and evaluation of evidence-based interventions.

Project description:BackgroundGender equality, zero hunger and healthy lives and well-being for all, are three of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that underpin Fiji's National Development Plan. Work towards each of these goals contributes to the reduction of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). There are gender differences in NCD burden in Fiji. It is, however, unclear whether a gender lens could be more effectively included in nutrition and health-related policies.MethodsThis study consisted of three components: (i) a policy content analysis of gender inclusion in nutrition and health-related policies (n = 11); (ii) policy analysis using the WHO Gender Analysis tool to identify opportunities for strengthening future policy; and (iii) informant interviews (n = 18), to understand perceptions of the prospects for gender considerations in future policies.ResultsGender equality was a goal in seven policies (64%); however, most focused on women of reproductive age. One of the policies was ranked as gender responsive. Main themes from key informant interviews were: 1) a needs-based approach for the focus on specific population groups in policies; 2) gender-related roles and responsibilities around nutrition and health; 3) what is considered "equitable" when it comes to gender, nutrition, and health; 4) current considerations of gender in policies and ideas for further gender inclusion; and 5) barriers and enablers to the inclusion of gender considerations in policies. Informants acknowledged gender differences in the burden of nutrition-related NCDs, yet most did not identify a need for stronger inclusion of gender considerations within policies.ConclusionsThere is considerable scope for greater inclusion of gender in nutrition and health-related policies in Fiji. This could be done by: 1) framing gender considerations in ways that are actionable and inclusive of a range of gender identities; 2) undertaking advocacy through actor networks to highlight the need for gender-responsive nutrition and health-related policies for key stakeholder groups; 3) ensuring that data collected to monitor policy implementation is disaggregated by sex and genders; and 4) promoting equitable participation in nutrition related issues in communities and governance processes. Action on these four areas are likely critical enablers to more gender equitable NCD reduction in Fiji.