PURPOSE: To analyze the frequency, rationale and determinants of attending physicians requesting that their eligible patients not be approached for participation in a thromboprophylaxis trial. METHODS: Research personnel in 67 centers prospectively documented eligible non-randomized patients due to physicians declining to allow their patients to be approached. RESULTS:In 67 centers, 3,764 patients were enrolled, but 1,460 eligible patients had no consent encounter. For 218 (14.9 %) of these, attending physicians requested that their patients not be approached. The most common reasons included a high risk of bleeding (31.2 %) related to fear of heparin bioaccumulation in renal failure, the presence of an epidural catheter, peri-operative status or other factors; specific preferences for thromboprophylaxis (12.4 %); morbid obesity (9.6 %); uncertain prognosis (6.4 %); general discomfort with research (3.7 %) and unclear reasons (17.0 %). Physicians were more likely to decline when approached by less experienced research personnel; considering those with[10 years of experience as the reference category, the odds ratios (OR) for physician refusals to personnel without trial experience was 10.47 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.19-50.02] and those with less than 10 years experience was 1.72 (95 % CI 0.61-4.84). Physicians in open rather than closed units were more likely to decline (OR 4.26; 95 % CI 1.27-14.34). Refusals decreased each year of enrollment compared to the pilot phase. CONCLUSIONS: Tracking, analyzing, interpreting and reporting the rates and reasons for physicians declining to allow their patients to be approached for enrollment provides insights into clinicians' concerns and attitudes to trials. This information can encourage physician communication and education, and potentially enhance efficient recruitment.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To analyze the frequency, rationale and determinants of attending physicians requesting that their eligible patients not be approached for participation in a thromboprophylaxis trial. METHODS: Research personnel in 67 centers prospectively documented eligible non-randomized patients due to physicians declining to allow their patients to be approached. RESULTS: In 67 centers, 3,764 patients were enrolled, but 1,460 eligible patients had no consent encounter. For 218 (14.9 %) of these, attending physicians requested that their patients not be approached. The most common reasons included a high risk of bleeding (31.2 %) related to fear of heparin bioaccumulation in renal failure, the presence of an epidural catheter, peri-operative status or other factors; specific preferences for thromboprophylaxis (12.4 %); morbid obesity (9.6 %); uncertain prognosis (6.4 %); general discomfort with research (3.7 %) and unclear reasons (17.0 %). Physicians were more likely to decline when approached by less experienced research personnel; considering those with[10 years of experience as the reference category, the odds ratios (OR) for physician refusals to personnel without trial experience was 10.47 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.19-50.02] and those with less than 10 years experience was 1.72 (95 % CI 0.61-4.84). Physicians in open rather than closed units were more likely to decline (OR 4.26; 95 % CI 1.27-14.34). Refusals decreased each year of enrollment compared to the pilot phase. CONCLUSIONS: Tracking, analyzing, interpreting and reporting the rates and reasons for physicians declining to allow their patients to be approached for enrollment provides insights into clinicians' concerns and attitudes to trials. This information can encourage physician communication and education, and potentially enhance efficient recruitment.
Authors: Deborah Cook; Mark Crowther; Maureen Meade; Christian Rabbat; Lauren Griffith; David Schiff; William Geerts; Gordon Guyatt Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Daniel De Backer; Patrick Biston; Jacques Devriendt; Christian Madl; Didier Chochrad; Cesar Aldecoa; Alexandre Brasseur; Pierre Defrance; Philippe Gottignies; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rakesh Patel; Deborah J Cook; Maureen O Meade; Lauren E Griffith; Geeta Mehta; Graeme M Rocker; John C Marshall; Rick Hodder; Claudio M Martin; Daren K Heyland; Sharon Peters; John Muscedere; Mark Soth; Nicole Campbell; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Deborah Cook; Maureen Meade; Gordon Guyatt; Lauren Griffith; John Granton; William Geerts; Mark Crowther Journal: Crit Care Date: 2004-05-06 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Ron Wald; Neill K J Adhikari; Orla M Smith; Matthew A Weir; Karen Pope; Ashley Cohen; Kevin Thorpe; Lauralyn McIntyre; Francois Lamontagne; Mark Soth; Margaret Herridge; Stephen Lapinsky; Edward Clark; Amit X Garg; Swapnil Hiremath; David Klein; C David Mazer; Robert M A Richardson; M Elizabeth Wilcox; Jan O Friedrich; Karen E A Burns; Sean M Bagshaw Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Elie Azoulay; Giuseppe Citerio; Jan Bakker; Matteo Bassetti; Dominique Benoit; Maurizio Cecconi; J Randall Curtis; Glenn Hernandez; Margaret Herridge; Samir Jaber; Michael Joannidis; Laurent Papazian; Mark Peters; Pierre Singer; Martin Smith; Marcio Soares; Antoni Torres; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Jean-François Timsit Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-01-24 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Pablo García-Olivares; Jose Eugenio Guerrero; Pedro Galdos; Demetrio Carriedo; Francisco Murillo; Antonio Rivera Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Jennie Johnstone; Maureen Meade; John Marshall; Daren K Heyland; Michael G Surette; Dawn Me Bowdish; Francois Lauzier; Lehana Thebane; Deborah J Cook Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2015-05-24