1 / 13

J Hollada W Marfori A Tognolini W Speier A Adibi S G Ruehm

Successful Patient Recruitment: What Drives or Deters Patient Participation in Radiological Research Studies?. J Hollada W Marfori A Tognolini W Speier A Adibi S G Ruehm. Clinical Trial Recruitment Challenges. General. Radiological. Contrast

beau-boyer
Download Presentation

J Hollada W Marfori A Tognolini W Speier A Adibi S G Ruehm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Successful Patient Recruitment: What Drives or Deters Patient Participation in Radiological Research Studies? J Hollada W Marfori A Tognolini W Speier A Adibi S G Ruehm

  2. Clinical Trial Recruitment Challenges General Radiological Contrast Pre-Medication (i.e. metoprolol/nitro) IV Placement Radiation • Time commitment • Possible loss of confidentiality • Personal opinions about research • “Guinea Pig” complex

  3. Steps to Trial Success Understand Patients’ Perspectives Customize Recruitment Strategy Meet Recruitment Goals Clinical Trial Success

  4. Objective • To analyze factors influencing patient participation in cardiac CT studies • To customize recruitment strategies

  5. Study Population • 3 ongoing clinical trials involving coronary CT angiography • 346 patients contacted over 9-month period • 134/346 patients randomly selected to participate in this IRB approved/HIPPA compliant study • 80/134 patients (mean age: 57 +/- 12) participated • 40/58 (12 female, 28 male) enrolled patients • 40/76 (20 female, 20 male) non-enrolled patients

  6. Methods • Questionnaire evaluated 12 decision factors (5-point scale: 1=not at all important to 5=extremely important) • Average ratings were calculated and grouped into 3 main importance categories: low ( 2.5), medium (2.5-3.5), high ( 3.5) • Rating distributions were compared between groups usingtwo-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests

  7. Results: Enrolling Patients Low Medium High

  8. Results: Non-Enrolling Patients Low Medium High

  9. Significance of Results • Two Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test • Enrolled patients’ concerns • Additional health information (p = 0.002) • Free imaging (p < 0.001) • Altruistic benefit to society (p < 0.000001) • Non-enrolledpatients’ concerns • Possible pre-medication (p < 0.00001) • Time commitment (p < 0.000001) • Radiation (p = 0.005 )

  10. Conclusion • Patients that decline clinical trial participation have different concerns from those that enroll • Perceived risk vs. perceived benefit • Insufficient knowledge of imaging

  11. FutureDirections • Compare factors influencing enrollment in other non-invasive cardiac imaging not involving ionizing radiation (i.e. MRI) • Compare concerns of different patient populations

  12. Acknowledgements • Addition Study Team • Eric Yang, MD • William Suh, MD • Dinah Lorenzo • Cardiovascular CT Team • Stefan Ruehm, MD • Antoinette Gomes, MD • Wanda Marfori, MD • Alessia Tognolini, MD • Cesar Arellano, MD • Ali Adibi, MD • Lindsey Ristow • Leila Mostafavi • William Speier, MS

More Related