1
|
Alvarez M, Hotton EJ, Harding S, Ives J, Crofts JF, Wade J. Women's and midwives' views on the optimum process for informed consent for research in a feasibility study involving an intrapartum intervention: a qualitative study. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2023; 9:98. [PMID: 37322539 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-023-01330-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2022] [Accepted: 05/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruitment to intrapartum research is complex. Women are expected to understand unfamiliar terminology and assess potential harm versus benefit to their baby and themselves, often when an urgent intervention is required. Time pressures of intrapartum interventions are a major challenge for recruitment discussions taking place during labour, with research midwives expected to present, discuss and answer questions whilst maintaining equipoise. However, little is known about these interactions. An integrated qualitative study (IQS) was used to investigate information provision for women invited to participate in the Assist II feasibility study investigating the OdonAssist™-a novel device for use in assisted vaginal birth with an aim to generate a framework of good practice for information provision. METHODS Transcripts of in-depth interviews with women participants (n = 25), with recruiting midwives (n = 6) and recruitment discussions between midwives and women (n = 21), accepting or declining participation, were coded and interpreted using thematic analysis and content analysis to investigate what was helpful to women and what could be improved. RESULTS Recruiting women to intrapartum research is complicated by factors that impact on women's understanding and decision-making. Three key themes were derived from the data: (i) a woman-centred recruitment process, (ii) optimising the recruitment discussion and (iii) making a decision for two. CONCLUSION Despite evidence from the literature that women would like information provision and the research discussion to take place in the antenatal period, intrapartum studies still vary in the recruitment processes they offer women. Particularly concerning is that some women are given information for the first time whilst in labour, when they are known to feel particularly vulnerable, and contextual factors may influence decision-making; therefore, we propose a framework for good practice for information provision for research involving interventions initiated in the intrapartum period as a woman centred, and acceptable model of recruitment, which addresses the concerns of women and midwives and facilitates fair inclusion into intrapartum trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN. This qualitative research was undertaken as part of the ASSIST II Trial (trial registration number: ISRCTN38829082. Prospectively registered on 26/06/2019).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Alvarez
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK.
- Bristol Medical School, Bristol University, BS8 2PS, Bristol, UK.
| | - Emily J Hotton
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
| | - Sam Harding
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK
- Research and Innovation, Learning and Research Building, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK
| | - Jonathan Ives
- Bristol Medical School, Bristol University, BS8 2PS, Bristol, UK
- Centre for Ethics in Medicine, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
| | - Joanna F Crofts
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK
| | - Julia Wade
- Bristol Medical School, Bristol University, BS8 2PS, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Molloy E, Pilarski N, Morris K, Hodgetts-Morton V, Jones L. The acceptability of emergency cervical cerclage within a randomised controlled trial for cervical dilatation with exposed membranes at 16–27 + 6 weeks gestation: Findings from a qualitative process evaluation of the C-STICH2 pilot trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2022; 279:27-39. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Revised: 09/29/2022] [Accepted: 10/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
3
|
Sweeney L, Lanz D, Daru J, Rasijeff AMP, Khanom F, Thomas A, Harden A, Green L. Deferred consent in emergency obstetric research: findings from qualitative interviews with women and recruiters in the ACROBAT pilot trial for severe postpartum haemorrhage. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e054787. [PMID: 35508349 PMCID: PMC9073399 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054787] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The ACROBAT pilot trial of early cryoprecipitate for severe postpartum haemorrhage used deferred consent procedures. Pretrial discussions with a patient and public involvement group found mixed views towards deferred consent. This study aimed to build an understanding of how the deferred consent procedures worked in practice, to inform plans for a full-scale trial. SETTING Qualitative interview study within a cluster-randomised pilot trial, involving four London maternity services. PARTICIPANTS Individual interviews were conducted postnatally with 10 women who had received blood transfusion for severe postpartum haemorrhage and had consented to the trial. We also interviewed four 'recruiters'-two research midwives and two clinical trials practitioners who conducted trial recruitment. RESULTS Consent procedures in the ACROBAT pilot trial were generally acceptable and the intervention was viewed as low risk, but most women did not remember much about the consent conversation. As per trial protocol, recruiters sought to consent women before hospital discharge, but this time pressure had to be balanced against the need to ensure women were not approached when distressed or very unwell. Extra efforts had to be made to communicate trial information to women due to the exhaustion of their recovery and competing demands for their attention. Participant information was further complicated by explanations about the cluster design and change in transfusion process, even though the consent sought was for access to medical data. CONCLUSION Our findings indicate that deferred consent procedures raise similar concerns as taking consent when emergency obstetric research is occurring-that is, the risk that participants may conflate research with clinical care, and that their ability to process trial information may be impacted by the stressful nature of recovery and newborn care. A future trial may support more meaningful informed consent by extending the window of consent discussion and ensuring trial information is minimal and easy to understand. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN12146519.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Doris Lanz
- Barts Research Centre for Women's Health, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Jahnavi Daru
- Barts Research Centre for Women's Health, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Annika M P Rasijeff
- Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Katie's Team Patient and Public Advisory Group, Barts Research Centre for Women's Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Farzana Khanom
- Katie's Team Patient and Public Advisory Group, Barts Research Centre for Women's Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Angela Harden
- School of Health Sciences, City University of London, London, UK
| | - Laura Green
- Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- NHS Blood and Transplant, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Law ZK, Appleton JP, Scutt P, Roberts I, Al-Shahi Salman R, England TJ, Werring DJ, Robinson T, Krishnan K, Dineen RA, Laska AC, Lyrer PA, Egea-Guerrero JJ, Karlinski M, Christensen H, Roffe C, Bereczki D, Ozturk S, Thanabalan J, Collins R, Beridze M, Ciccone A, Duley L, Shone A, Bath PM, Sprigg N. Brief Consent Methods Enable Rapid Enrollment in Acute Stroke Trial: Results From the TICH-2 Randomized Controlled Trial. Stroke 2022; 53:1141-1148. [PMID: 34847710 PMCID: PMC7612544 DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.121.035191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2021] [Revised: 08/26/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Seeking consent rapidly in acute stroke trials is crucial as interventions are time sensitive. We explored the association between consent pathways and time to enrollment in the TICH-2 (Tranexamic Acid in Intracerebral Haemorrhage-2) randomized controlled trial. METHODS Consent was provided by patients or by a relative or an independent doctor in incapacitated patients, using a 1-stage (full written consent) or 2-stage (initial brief consent followed by full written consent post-randomization) approach. The computed tomography-to-randomization time according to consent pathways was compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify variables associated with onset-to-randomization time of ≤3 hours. RESULTS Of 2325 patients, 817 (35%) gave self-consent using 1-stage (557; 68%) or 2-stage consent (260; 32%). For 1507 (65%), consent was provided by a relative (1 stage, 996 [66%]; 2 stage, 323 [21%]) or a doctor (all 2-stage, 188 [12%]). One patient did not record prerandomization consent, with written consent obtained subsequently. The median (interquartile range) computed tomography-to-randomization time was 55 (38-93) minutes for doctor consent, 55 (37-95) minutes for 2-stage patient, 69 (43-110) minutes for 2-stage relative, 75 (48-124) minutes for 1-stage patient, and 90 (56-155) minutes for 1-stage relative consents (P<0.001). Two-stage consent was associated with onset-to-randomization time of ≤3 hours compared with 1-stage consent (adjusted odds ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.5-2.4]). Doctor consent increased the odds (adjusted odds ratio, 2.3 [1.5-3.5]) while relative consent reduced the odds of randomization ≤3 hours (adjusted odds ratio, 0.10 [0.03-0.34]) compared with patient consent. Only 2 of 771 patients (0.3%) in the 2-stage pathways withdrew consent when full consent was sought later. Two-stage consent process did not result in higher withdrawal rates or loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS The use of initial brief consent was associated with shorter times to enrollment, while maintaining good participant retention. Seeking written consent from relatives was associated with significant delays. REGISTRATION URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN93732214.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Kang Law
- Stroke Trials Unit (Z.K.L., J.P.A., P.S., P.M.B., N.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- Department of Medicine (Z.K.L.), National University of Malaysia
| | - Jason P. Appleton
- Stroke Trials Unit (Z.K.L., J.P.A., P.S., P.M.B., N.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- Stroke, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom (J.P.A.)
| | - Polly Scutt
- Stroke Trials Unit (Z.K.L., J.P.A., P.S., P.M.B., N.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Roberts
- Clinical Trials Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom (I.R.)
| | | | - Timothy J. England
- Vascular Medicine, Division of Medical Sciences and GEM, Royal Derby Hospital Centre (T.J.E.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - David J. Werring
- Stroke Research Centre, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom (D.J.W.)
| | - Thompson Robinson
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, United Kingdom (T.R.)
| | - Kailash Krishnan
- Stroke, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom (K.K., P.M.B., N.S.)
| | - Robert A. Dineen
- Radiological Sciences (R.A.D.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, United Kingdom (R.A.D.)
| | - Ann Charlotte Laska
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institute Danderyd Hospital, Sweden (A.C.L.)
| | - Philippe A. Lyrer
- Department of Neurology and Stroke Center, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Switzerland (P.A.L.)
| | | | | | - Hanne Christensen
- Department of Neurology, Bispebjerg Hospital and University of Copenhagen, Denmark (H.C.)
| | - Christine Roffe
- Stroke Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle-Under-Lyme, United Kingdom (C.R.)
| | - Daniel Bereczki
- Department of Neurology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary (D.B.)
| | - Serefnur Ozturk
- Selcuk University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Konya, Turkey (S.O.)
| | - Jegan Thanabalan
- Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery (J.T.), National University of Malaysia
| | - Ronan Collins
- Age Related Health Care/Stroke-Service, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Republic of Ireland (R.C.)
| | - Maia Beridze
- The First University Clinic of Tbilisi State Medical University, GA (M.B.)
| | - Alfonso Ciccone
- Neurology and Stroke Unit, Poma Hospital, ASST di Mantova, Mantua, Italy (A.C.)
| | - Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit (L.D.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - Angela Shone
- Research and Innovation (A.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - Philip M. Bath
- Stroke Trials Unit (Z.K.L., J.P.A., P.S., P.M.B., N.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- Stroke, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom (K.K., P.M.B., N.S.)
| | - Nikola Sprigg
- Stroke Trials Unit (Z.K.L., J.P.A., P.S., P.M.B., N.S.), University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- Stroke, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom (K.K., P.M.B., N.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
McLeish J, Alderdice F, Robberts H, Cole C, Dorling J, Gale C. Challenges of a simplified opt-out consent process in a neonatal randomised controlled trial: qualitative study of parents' and health professionals' views and experiences. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2021; 106:244-250. [PMID: 33139313 PMCID: PMC8070626 DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2020-319545] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2020] [Revised: 09/07/2020] [Accepted: 09/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND More effective recruitment strategies like alternative approaches to consent are needed to facilitate adequately powered trials. Witholding Enteral feeds Around Transfusion was a multicentre, randomised, pilot trial that compared withholding and continuing feeds around transfusion. The primary clinical outcome was necrotising enterocolitis. The trial used simplified opt-out consent with concise parent information and no consent form. OBJECTIVE To explore the views and experiences of parents and health professionals on the acceptability and feasibility of opt-out consent in randomised comparative effectiveness trials. METHODS A qualitative, descriptive interview-based study nested within a randomised trial. Semistructured interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. SETTING Eleven neonatal units in England. PARTICIPANTS Eleven parents and ten health professionals with experience of simplified consent. RESULTS Five themes emerged: 'opt-out consent operationalised as verbal opt-in consent', 'opt-out consent normalises participation while preserving parental choice', 'opt-out consent as an ongoing process of informed choice', 'consent without a consent form' and 'choosing to opt out of a comparative effectiveness trial', with two subthemes: 'wanting "normal care"' and 'a belief that feeding is better'. CONCLUSION Introducing a novel form of consent proved challenging in practice. The principle of a simplified, opt-out approach to consent was generally considered feasible and acceptable by health professionals for a neonatal comparative effectiveness trial. The priority for parents was having the right to decide about trial participation, and they did not see opt-out consent as undermining this. Describing a study as 'opt-out' can help to normalise participation and emphasise that parents can withdraw consent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenny McLeish
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Fiona Alderdice
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | | | - Christina Cole
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Jon Dorling
- Division of Neonatal–Perinatal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Chris Gale
- Academic Neonatal Medicine, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hanrahan V, Gillies K, Biesty L. Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0234783. [PMID: 32559236 PMCID: PMC7304625 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2020] [Accepted: 06/02/2020] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Research on research is key to enhancing efficacy in trial methodology. Clinical trials involving women during pregnancy and childbirth are limited, with a paucity of data guiding evidence-based practice. Following a prioritisation exercise that highlighted the top-ten unanswered recruitment questions, this qualitative evidence synthesis was designed specifically to focus on the barriers and enablers for clinicians/healthcare professionals in helping conduct randomised trials within the context of recruitment during pregnancy and childbirth. METHODS The synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden's three stage thematic synthesis method and reported following the ENTREQ guidelines. Using a pre-determined SPIDER strategy, we conducted a comprehensive search of databases; Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and grey searches for records until January 2019. We included all reports of qualitative data on recruiter's experiences, perceptions, views of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials. Altogether 13,401 records were screened, resulting in 31 full-text reviews, of which five were eligible for inclusion. Quality was appraised using CASP. Data were extracted onto a specifically defined form. We used thematic synthesis to identify descriptive and analytical themes, and to interpret and generate theory. Confidence was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. The review protocol is publicly available (OSF https://osf.io/g4dt9/). RESULTS Five papers (representing four individual studies) from two different countries were included. All studies focused on the experiences of trial recruiters in the maternity setting. We identified four analytical themes; Recruitment through a clinician's lens, Recruiters judgement on acceptability, From protocol to recruiters lived experience, Framing recruitment in context. These were linked by an overarching theme combining beliefs and power. CONCLUSION The overarching theme combining beliefs and power links the experiences and perceptions of recruiters. This synthesis shows a gap between the trial design study protocol and the recruiter's lived experience. Strategies such as collaborative trial design, mitigating gatekeeping behaviours, and training may support recruiters in their endeavour.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivienne Hanrahan
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Linda Biesty
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
den Boer MC, Houtlosser M, Foglia EE, Lopriore E, de Vries MC, Engberts DP, Te Pas AB. Deferred consent for delivery room studies: the providers' perspective. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2020; 105:310-315. [PMID: 31427459 DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2019-317280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2019] [Revised: 07/22/2019] [Accepted: 08/03/2019] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To gain insight into neonatal care providers' perceptions of deferred consent for delivery room (DR) studies in actual scenarios. METHODS We conducted semistructured interviews with 46 neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) staff members of the Leiden University Medical Center (the Netherlands) and the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (USA). At the time interviews were conducted, both NICUs conducted the same DR studies, but differed in their consent approaches. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the qualitative data analysis software Atlas.ti V.7.0. RESULTS Although providers reported to regard the prospective consent approach as the most preferable consent approach, they acknowledged that a deferred consent approach is needed for high-quality DR management. However, providers reported concerns about parental autonomy, approaching parents for consent and ethical review of study protocols that include a deferred consent approach. Providers furthermore differed in perceived appropriateness of a deferred consent approach for the studies that were being conducted at their NICUs. Providers with first-hand experience with deferred consent reported positive experiences that they attributed to appropriate communication and timing of approaching parents for consent. CONCLUSION Insight into providers' perceptions of deferred consent for DR studies in actual scenarios suggests that a deferred consent approach is considered acceptable, but that actual usage of the approach for DR studies can be improved on.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria C den Boer
- Division of Neonatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands .,Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Mirjam Houtlosser
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Elizabeth E Foglia
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Enrico Lopriore
- Division of Neonatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Martine Charlotte de Vries
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.,Pediatrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Dirk P Engberts
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Arjan B Te Pas
- Division of Neonatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Duley L, Dorling J, Ayers S, Oliver S, Yoxall CW, Weeks A, Megone C, Oddie S, Gyte G, Chivers Z, Thornton J, Field D, Sawyer A, McGuire W. Improving quality of care and outcome at very preterm birth: the Preterm Birth research programme, including the Cord pilot RCT. PROGRAMME GRANTS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH 2019. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar07080] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Background
Being born very premature (i.e. before 32 weeks’ gestation) has an impact on survival and quality of life. Improving care at birth may improve outcomes and parents’ experiences.
Objectives
To improve the quality of care and outcomes following very preterm birth.
Design
We used mixed methods, including a James Lind Alliance prioritisation, a systematic review, a framework synthesis, a comparative review, qualitative studies, development of a questionnaire tool and a medical device (a neonatal resuscitation trolley), a survey of practice, a randomised trial and a protocol for a prospective meta-analysis using individual participant data.
Setting
For the prioritisation, this included people affected by preterm birth and health-care practitioners in the UK relevant to preterm birth. The qualitative work on preterm birth and the development of the questionnaire involved parents of infants born at three maternity hospitals in southern England. The medical device was developed at Liverpool Women’s Hospital. The survey of practice involved UK neonatal units. The randomised trial was conducted at eight UK tertiary maternity hospitals.
Participants
For prioritisation, 26 organisations and 386 individuals; for the interviews and questionnaire tool, 32 mothers and seven fathers who had a baby born before 32 weeks’ gestation for interviews evaluating the trolley, 30 people who had experienced it being used at the birth of their baby (19 mothers, 10 partners and 1 grandmother) and 20 clinicians who were present when it was being used; for the trial, 261 women expected to have a live birth before 32 weeks’ gestation, and their 276 babies.
Interventions
Providing neonatal care at very preterm birth beside the mother, and with the umbilical cord intact; timing of cord clamping at very preterm birth.
Main outcome measures
Research priorities for preterm birth; feasibility and acceptability of the trolley; feasibility of a randomised trial, death and intraventricular haemorrhage.
Review methods
Systematic review of Cochrane reviews (umbrella review); framework synthesis of ethics aspects of consent, with conceptual framework to inform selection criteria for empirical and analytical studies. The comparative review included studies using a questionnaire to assess satisfaction with care during childbirth, and provided psychometric information.
Results
Our prioritisation identified 104 research topics for preterm birth, with the top 30 ranked. An ethnographic analysis of decision-making during this process suggested ways that it might be improved. Qualitative interviews with parents about their experiences of very preterm birth identified two differences with term births: the importance of the staff appearing calm and of staff taking control. Following a comparative review, this led to the development of a questionnaire to assess parents’ views of care during very preterm birth. A systematic overview summarised evidence for delivery room neonatal care and revealed significant evidence gaps. The framework synthesis explored ethics issues in consent for trials involving sick or preterm infants, concluding that no existing process is ideal and identifying three important gaps. This led to the development of a two-stage consent pathway (oral assent followed by written consent), subsequently evaluated in our randomised trial. Our survey of practice for care at the time of birth showed variation in approaches to cord clamping, and that no hospitals were providing neonatal care with the cord intact. We showed that neonatal care could be provided beside the mother using either the mobile neonatal resuscitation trolley we developed or existing equipment. Qualitative interviews suggested that neonatal care beside the mother is valued by parents and acceptable to clinicians. Our pilot randomised trial compared cord clamping after 2 minutes and initial neonatal care, if needed, with the cord intact, with clamping within 20 seconds and initial neonatal care after clamping. This study demonstrated feasibility of a large UK randomised trial. Of 135 infants allocated to cord clamping ≥ 2 minutes, 7 (5.2%) died and, of 135 allocated to cord clamping ≤ 20 seconds, 15 (11.1%) died (risk difference –5.9%, 95% confidence interval –12.4% to 0.6%). Of live births, 43 out of 134 (32%) allocated to cord clamping ≥ 2 minutes had intraventricular haemorrhage compared with 47 out of 132 (36%) allocated to cord clamping ≤ 20 seconds (risk difference –3.5%, 95% CI –14.9% to 7.8%).
Limitations
Small sample for the qualitative interviews about preterm birth, single-centre evaluation of neonatal care beside the mother, and a pilot trial.
Conclusions
Our programme of research has improved understanding of parent experiences of very preterm birth, and informed clinical guidelines and the research agenda. Our two-stage consent pathway is recommended for intrapartum clinical research trials. Our pilot trial will contribute to the individual participant data meta-analysis, results of which will guide design of future trials.
Future work
Research in preterm birth should take account of the top priorities. Further evaluation of neonatal care beside the mother is merited, and future trial of alternative policies for management of cord clamping should take account of the meta-analysis.
Study registration
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003038 and CRD42013004405. In addition, Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21456601.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 7, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Jon Dorling
- Department of Child Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Susan Ayers
- Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, UK
| | - Sandy Oliver
- Social Science Research Unit and EPPI-Centre, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Andrew Weeks
- University of Liverpool and Liverpool Women’s Hospital, Members of Liverpool Health Partners, UK
| | - Chris Megone
- Inter Disciplinary Ethics Applied, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Sam Oddie
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| | - Gill Gyte
- National Childbirth Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Jim Thornton
- Department of Child Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - David Field
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | | | - William McGuire
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Brown P, Hewison A, Newham R. What are research nurses' experiences of obtaining consent from or for patients participating in emergency care research? A qualitative review. J Clin Nurs 2019; 28:4155-4165. [PMID: 31241806 DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2019] [Revised: 06/06/2019] [Accepted: 06/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION If studies are to be valid, recruitment of representative samples is essential. In 2012, 28% of UK emergency departments met the 80% standard for recruitment to trials set by the National Institute for Health Research. Research nurses play a vital role in the conduct of high-quality research, and it has been argued that dedicated research nurses are needed if clinical trials are to recruit successfully to target. REVIEW QUESTION What are research nurses' experiences of obtaining consent from or for patients participating in emergency care research? A qualitative evidence review. METHODS A qualitative integrative literature review with a narrative synthesis of the evidence. PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic qualitative reviews (Appendix S1) were followed. A search of five electronic databases was performed in December 2018 along with a hand search which yielded 125 citations: 10 papers and one PhD thesis met the review eligibility criteria. Methodological quality of the selected studies was evaluated, and data were extracted and synthesised. RESULTS Three themes were identified: Access, Organisation and Timing. Research nurses encountered both general and specific barriers when seeking to obtain consent for participation in research. In particular, it was found there was lack of experience among staff of working in emergency research and with securing deferred consent. The distinction between nurse researchers with a clinical role and those dedicated to solely to research only is often not clear and warrants further investigation. CONCLUSION Nurse researchers with and without a clinical role can make a positive difference in recruitment to trials in emergency care. The involvement of dedicated research nurses in the consent process can increase recruitment to emergency care research. Experience of recruiting to clinical trials in nonemergency settings does not seem to help when recruiting for trials in emergency care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE There is a need for greater understanding of the experiences of dedicated research nurses in emergency care settings and in particular with regard to deferred consent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alistair Hewison
- School of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, UK
| | - Roger Newham
- School of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Bradshaw L, Sawyer A, Mitchell E, Armstrong-Buisseret L, Ayers S, Duley L. Women's experiences of participating in a randomised trial comparing alternative policies for timing of cord clamping at very preterm birth: a questionnaire study. Trials 2019; 20:225. [PMID: 30992034 PMCID: PMC6469101 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3325-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2018] [Accepted: 03/25/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Cord Pilot Trial compared two alternative policies for cord-clamping at very preterm birth at eight UK tertiary maternity units: clamping after at least 2 min and immediate neonatal care with cord intact, or clamping within 20 s and neonatal care after clamping. This paper reports views and experiences of the women who participated in the trial (261 randomised), based on data from two self-completed questionnaires. METHODS Women were given or posted the first questionnaire between 4 and 8 weeks after birth, and posted a second similar questionnaire at 1 year. Both questionnaires included three questions about experiences of participating in the trial: (1) If time suddenly went backwards and you had to do it all over again, would you agree to participate in the Cord Pilot Trial?; (2) Please tell us if there was anything about the Cord Pilot Trial that you think could have been done better; and (3) Please tell us if there was anything about the Cord Pilot Trial, or your experiences of joining the trial, that you think were particularly good. RESULTS One hundred and eighty-six women completed the first questionnaire and 133 completed the second. At both time points, 90% responded 'probably' or 'definitely' to participating in the trial again. More women randomised to deferred clamping responded 'definitely yes' than those allocated immediate clamping (78% versus 67% first questionnaire). Women were positive about the level of information and explanations, the friendly and caring staff, and the benefits for their baby and others as a result of participating in the trial. Suggestions for how the trial could be done better included being approached earlier, better staff communication about the trial, more information overall, and better timing of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Women were largely positive about participating in the trial. Nevertheless, they had suggestions for how the study could have been improved. These suggestions have implications for the design of future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN21456601 . Registered on 28 February 2013.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Bradshaw
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK
| | - Alexandra Sawyer
- School of Health Sciences, University of Brighton, Falmer, BN1 9PH, UK
| | - Eleanor Mitchell
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK
| | | | - Susan Ayers
- Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health Sciences, City University London, London, EC1V 0HB, UK
| | - Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Walsh V, Oddie S, McGuire W. Ethical Issues in Perinatal Clinical Research. Neonatology 2019; 116:52-57. [PMID: 30947194 DOI: 10.1159/000494934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2018] [Accepted: 10/28/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perinatal clinical research to improve the quality of care and outcomes for newborn infants relies on transparency, trust, and respect for the autonomy and well-being of study participants and their families. METHODS Here we consider the underpinning principles of ethical research with a focus on perinatal clinical research in the acute care or emergency setting where particular challenges to parental engagement and informed consent exist. RESULTS Several approaches to improving the validity of the consent process for perinatal research have been proposed and evaluated. These include consent waiver, antenatal consent, deferred consent preceded by verbal assent, and continuous consent. These have strengths and weaknesses and uncertainty remains about their validity and acceptability in certain research contexts. Prior exploration with parents and parent-advocacy groups of approaches to engagement and consent, and independent evaluation and ongoing monitoring of research studies, can enhance adherence to the ethical principles of justice and autonomy, and ensure that benefits to participants and their families exceed harm. CONCLUSIONS High-quality research and ethics are interdependent. Only research that meets ethical standards can be regarded as valid and applicable, and only research designs that are methodologically rigorous and appropriate can be regarded as ethical.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Verena Walsh
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom
| | - Sam Oddie
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom.,Neonatal Unit, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, United Kingdom
| | - William McGuire
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom,
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sawyer A, Chhoa C, Ayers S, Pushpa-Rajah A, Duley L. Women's views and experiences of two alternative consent pathways for participation in a preterm intrapartum trial: a qualitative study. Trials 2017; 18:422. [PMID: 28886747 PMCID: PMC5591564 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2149-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2016] [Accepted: 08/16/2017] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The Cord Pilot Trial compared alternative policies for timing of cord clamping at very preterm birth at eight UK hospitals. In addition to standard written consent, an oral assent pathway was developed for use when birth was imminent. The aim of this study was to explore women’s views and experiences of two alternative consent pathways to participate in the Cord Pilot Trial. Methods We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. A total of 179 participants in the Cord Pilot Trial were sent a postal invitation to take part in interviews. Women who agreed were interviewed in person or by telephone to explore their experiences of two consent pathways for a preterm intrapartum trial. Data were analysed using inductive systematic thematic analysis. Results Twenty-three women who gave either written consent (n = 18) or oral assent followed by written consent (n = 5) to participate in the trial were interviewed. Five themes were identified: (1) understanding of the implications of randomisation, (2) importance of staff offering participation, (3) information about the trial and time to consider participation, (4) trial secondary in women’s minds and (5) reasons for agreeing to take part in the trial. Experiences were similar for the two consent pathways. Women recruited by the oral assent pathway reported being given less information about the trial but felt it was sufficient to make a decision regarding participation. There were gaps in women’s understanding of the trial and intervention, regardless of the consent pathway. Conclusions Overall, women were positive about their experiences of being invited to participate in the trial. The oral assent pathway seems an acceptable option for women if the intervention is low-risk and time is limited. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN21456601. Registered on 28 February 2013. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2149-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra Sawyer
- Centre for Health Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Brighton, Falmer, BN1 9PH, UK.
| | - Celine Chhoa
- Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health Sciences, City University London, London, EC1R 1UW, UK
| | - Susan Ayers
- Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health Sciences, City University London, London, EC1R 1UW, UK
| | | | - Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK
| |
Collapse
|