Abstract

Better treatment options are needed in life-threatening infections, including health care-associated pneumonia. Enrolling patients in antibacterial clinical trials before diagnosis may circumvent existing time-to-enrollment constraints. However, the acceptability of an early enrollment strategy using advance consent is unknown. To assess the perceived acceptability of an early enrollment strategy for enrolling patients in an antibacterial clinical trial before a pneumonia diagnosis. This qualitative, descriptive study used semistructured telephone interviews. Framed within a planned noninferiority pneumonia antibiotic trial, an early enrollment strategy was described and perceptions were assessed. Using this strategy, patients give consent to enroll before developing pneumonia, to be monitored by study staff, and to be randomly assigned a study antibiotic if pneumonia develops. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Fifty-two key stakeholders from across the United States, including 18 patients at risk of pneumonia, 12 caregivers, 10 representatives of institutional review boards, 7 investigators, and 5 study coordinators, were interviewed from June 20 to August 19, 2016. Perceived acceptability of the early enrollment strategy. Among the 52 stakeholders interviewed (ages 29-75 years; 14 women), patients and caregivers expressed no concerns about patients being approached about participation before developing pneumonia; however, some patients may experience anxiety on learning about their risk for pneumonia. No concerns with study staff accessing patients' medical records were expressed. The clarity of consent information was important for understanding the study rather than having the condition under investigation. Among patients, caregivers, and institutional review board representatives, preferences varied regarding opt-out and precedent autonomy procedures. Nearly all patients would be willing to join a trial using the early enrollment strategy and caregivers would be willing to provide proxy consent. Institutional review board representatives were supportive of the strategy and made recommendations for the study protocol, primarily around informed consent. Investigators and study coordinators believed the strategy would not be burdensome and offered suggestions to ensure its feasibility. Results of the study suggest that the early enrollment strategy is acceptable. Future research should evaluate whether the strategy improves enrollment rates in registrational pneumonia trials and in trials of other acute infection syndromes with narrow enrollment windows and/or patients with transient decisional incapacity.

Highlights

  • On any given day, approximately 1 in 25 patients in US acute care hospitals have a health care– associated infection

  • High-quality clinical trials to identify antibiotics for HABP/ VABP are difficult to conduct and prohibitively expensive, costing upwards of $90 000 per enrolled patient, primarily because of the large number of patients who must be screened for eligibility.[3]

  • We interviewed 52 key stakeholders from across the United States, including 18 patients at risk of HABP/VABP, 12 caregivers of patients at risk of HABP/VABP, 10 Institutional Review Board (IRB) representatives, 7 investigators, and 5 study coordinators

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Approximately 1 in 25 patients in US acute care hospitals have a health care– associated infection. This apparent paradox between common infections and infrequent trial eligibility is in part attributable to difficulty in identifying patients, confirming HABP/VABP, and obtaining informed consent from patients who urgently need treatment and from very ill patients who may no longer be able to consent for themselves.[4,5] prior effective antibacterial drug therapy may limit the ability to assess the effect of a new antibacterial drug in a noninferiority clinical trial.[6,7,8] These factors lead to a very limited window for enrollment

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.