Literature DB >> 19433742

Who will participate in acute stroke trials?

S E Kasner1, A Del Giudice, S Rosenberg, M Sheen, J M Luciano, B L Cucchiara, S R Messé, L H Sansing, J M Baren.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the high incidence of acute stroke, only a minority of patients are enrolled in acute stroke treatment trials. We aimed to identify factors associated with participation in clinical trials of novel therapeutic agents for acute stroke.
METHODS: Prospective survey of patients with acute stroke <72 hours from onset. A structured interview was administered to the patient or primary decision-maker. If offered participation in an actual acute treatment trial, questions focused on decisions about that trial; otherwise a similar mock trial was proposed. The primary outcome was whether the subject agreed to participate in the proposed trial.
RESULTS: A total of 200 subjects (47% patients, 53% proxies) completed the survey: mean age 63 +/- 14 years, 47% women, 44% white, 50% black. A real acute trial was offered to 22%; others were offered a mock trial. Overall, 57% (95% confidence interval: 50%-64%) of respondents stated they would participate in the proposed acute treatment trial. There were no differences with respect to age, sex, race, educational level, self-assessed stroke severity or stroke type, vascular risk factors, or comorbidities. Misconceptions about key research concepts were found in 50% but did not impact participation. Participation was associated with the perceived risk of the proposed trial intervention (p < 0.001), prior general attitudes about research (p < 0.001), and influences attributed to family, religion, and other personal beliefs (p < 0.001). Patients were more likely to participate than proxy decision-makers (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Demographic factors, clinical factors, and prior knowledge about research have little impact on the decision to participate in acute stroke clinical trials. Preexisting negative attitudes and external influences about research strongly inhibit participation. Patients are more inclined to participate than their proxy decision-makers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19433742      PMCID: PMC2683644          DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181a55fbe

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurology        ISSN: 0028-3878            Impact factor:   9.910


  31 in total

1.  Who will enroll? Predicting participation in a phase II AIDS vaccine trial.

Authors:  S D Halpern; D S Metzger; J A Berlin; P A Ubel
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2001-07-01       Impact factor: 3.731

2.  Intra-arterial prourokinase for acute ischemic stroke. The PROACT II study: a randomized controlled trial. Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism.

Authors:  A Furlan; R Higashida; L Wechsler; M Gent; H Rowley; C Kase; M Pessin; A Ahuja; F Callahan; W M Clark; F Silver; F Rivera
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-12-01       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Attitudes of emergency department patients and visitors regarding emergency exception from informed consent in resuscitation research, community consultation, and public notification.

Authors:  Katie B McClure; Nicole M DeIorio; Mary D Gunnels; Maria J Ochsner; Michelle H Biros; Terri A Schmidt
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.451

4.  Do surrogate decision makers provide accurate consent for intensive care research?

Authors:  M Coppolino; L Ackerson
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 9.410

5.  Hypertensive patients' willingness to participate in placebo-controlled trials: implications for recruitment efficiency.

Authors:  Scott D Halpern; Jason H T Karlawish; David Casarett; Jesse A Berlin; Raymond R Townsend; David A Asch
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.749

6.  Willingness to participate in cardiac trials.

Authors:  Eric D Peterson; Barbara L Lytle; Mimi S Biswas; Laura Coombs
Journal:  Am J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb

7.  Influence of race, clinical, and other socio-demographic features on trial participation.

Authors:  Giselle Corbie-Smith; Catherine M Viscoli; Walter N Kernan; Lawrence M Brass; Philip Sarrel; Ralph I Horwitz
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 8.  Prospective preference assessment: a method to enhance the ethics and efficiency of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2002-06

9.  Utilization of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Irene L Katzan; Maxim D Hammer; Eric D Hixson; Anthony J Furlan; Alex Abou-Chebl; Deborah M Nadzam
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2004-03

10.  How important is surrogate consent for stroke research?

Authors:  M L Flaherty; J Karlawish; J C Khoury; D Kleindorfer; D Woo; J P Broderick
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 9.910

View more
  17 in total

1.  Exception from informed consent for emergency research: consulting the trauma community.

Authors:  Carrie A Sims; Joshua A Isserman; Daniel Holena; Latha Mary Sundaram; Nikolai Tolstoy; Sarah Greer; Seema Sonnad; Jose Pascual; Patrick Reilly
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.313

Review 2.  Trends in Recruitment Rates for Acute Stroke Trials, 1990-2014.

Authors:  William B Feldman; Anthony S Kim; Winston Chiong
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  Understanding factors contributing to participant satisfaction in stroke walking recovery clinical trials.

Authors:  Mark Cummings; Sonia Pradhan; Sangeetha Madhavan
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2022-06-11

4.  Recruitment of black subjects for a natural history study of intracerebral hemorrhage.

Authors:  Dorothy F Edwards; Ravi Menon; Ali Fokar; Christopher Gibbons; Jeffrey Wing; Brisa Sanchez; Chelsea S Kidwell
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2013-02

5.  Community attitudes towards emergency research and exception from informed consent.

Authors:  Michelle H Biros; Corey Sargent; Kathleen Miller
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 5.262

6.  Can response-adaptive randomization increase participation in acute stroke trials?

Authors:  Jason S Tehranisa; William J Meurer
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 7.  Effect of waivers of consent on recruitment in acute stroke trials: A systematic review.

Authors:  William B Feldman; Anthony S Kim; S Andrew Josephson; Daniel H Lowenstein; Winston Chiong
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 9.910

8.  Development of a Questionnaire to Investigate Study Design Factors Influencing Participation in Gait Rehabilitation Research by People with Stroke: A Brief Report.

Authors:  Kara K Patterson; Nicole Gallant; Tracey Ormiston; Chad Patience; Mandy Whitechurch; Avril Mansfield; Janet Brown
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.037

9.  Why Are Women Less Represented in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Trials?

Authors:  Tatiana Greige; Casey Norton; Lydia D Foster; Sharon D Yeatts; Andre Thornhill; Jessica Griffin; Jeffrey Wang; Courtney M Hrdlicka; Magdy Selim
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 7.914

10.  Informed consent: the rate-limiting step in acute stroke trials.

Authors:  David Z Rose; Scott E Kasner
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.