RESUMO
BACKGROUND: First-degree relatives (FDRs, defined as parents, children, and siblings) of melanoma patients are at a two-to-fivefold increased risk of developing melanoma themselves. FDRs are advised to perform self-skin examination (SSE) and annual medical total cutaneous examination (TCE) performed either by a dermatologist or a general practitioner, and to change their sun-related behavior. This advice is given orally to melanoma patients who are asked to relay the information to their FDRs. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the impact of providing a tip sheet to melanoma patients intended to their first-degree relatives (FDRs) on early detection and sun-related behaviors in this group at increased risk of melanoma. METHODS: A superiority, cluster-randomized trial was conducted at nine hospital centers. In the intervention group, dermatologists were asked to deliver to melanoma patients (index cases) the tip sheet and oral advice intended to their FDRs. The control group were asked to deliver the usual oral advice alone. The primary outcome was early detection of melanoma in FDRs with a medical TCE performed within one year after the first visit of the index case. Secondary outcomes were SSE and sun-related behaviors in FDRs. RESULTS: A total of 48 index cases and 114 FDRS in the control group, 60 index cases and 166 FDRS in the intervention group were recruited. In the intervention group, 36.1% of FDRs performed a medical TCE as compared to 39.5% of FDRs in the control group (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.5 to 1.5], p = 0.63). We did not find a between-group difference in SSE and sun-related behaviors. CONCLUSION: A tip sheet added to the usual oral advice did not increase medical TCE among FDRs of melanoma patients. Overall, the rate of TCE among FDRs was low. Research on other strategies is needed to increase melanoma detection in this population.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To explore challenges in recruitment and intervention implementation in recent stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials (SW-CRTs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched PubMed to identify primary reports of SW-CRTs (2019-2020). Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data from each report. A recruitment challenge was defined as a planned number of clusters or participants not achieved or any reported changes made to the design to address recruitment difficulties. An implementation challenge was defined as early, late, or no implementation of the intervention in at least one cluster. RESULTS: Of 55 SW-CRTs, 18 (33%) had a recruitment challenge, 23 (42%) had none, and for 14 (26%) it was impossible to judge. At least one implementation challenge was present in 24 (44%), eight (15%) had none, and for 23 (42%) it was impossible to judge. Of the 35 (64%) trials with recruitment or implementation challenges, 18 (72%) had one or more modifications of their design, most often a modification of the trial duration. CONCLUSION: Investigators must be aware of the risks of recruitment or implementation challenges when considering the use of an SW-CRT design. Mitigating strategies should be adopted when planning the trial. More transparent reporting of planned and actual design features is required.
