ABSTRACT
Objective: To identify reasons for nonparticipation by African Americans in cardiovascular pharmacogenomic research. Design: Prospective, open-ended, qualitative survey. Setting: Research staff approached patients eligible for the Discovery Project of The African American Cardiovascular pharmacogenomics CONsorTium in the inpatient or outpatient setting at four different institutions during September and October 2018. Participants: Potential Discovery Project participants self-identified as African American, aged >18 years, were on one of five cardiovascular drugs of interest, and declined enrollment in the Discovery Project. Main Outcome Measures: Reasons for nonparticipation. Methods: After declining participation in the Discovery Project, patients were asked, "What are your reasons for not participating?" We analyzed their responses using a directed content analytic approach. Ultimately, responses were coded into one of nine categories and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Of the 194 people approached for the Discovery Project during an eight-week period, 82 declined participation and provided information for this study. The most common reason for refusal was concern about the amount of blood drawn (19.5%). The next most common reasons for refusal to participate included concerns about genetic testing (14.6%) and mistrust of research (12.2%). Across study sites, significantly more patients enrolled in the inpatient than outpatient setting (P<.001). Significantly more women and younger individuals declined participation due to concerns about genetic testing and too little compensation (P<.05). Conclusions: Collection of blood samples and concerns about genetic testing are obstacles for the recruitment of African Americans to pharmacogenomics studies. Efforts to overcome these barriers to participation are needed to improve representation of minorities in pharmacogenomic research. Enrolling participants from inpatient populations may be a solution to bolster recruitment efforts.
Subject(s)
Attitude to Health/ethnology , Black or African American/psychology , Patient Participation/psychology , Pharmacogenetics/ethics , Research Subjects/psychology , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/psychology , Prospective Studies , Social Perception , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-3350, approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only for constipation, combined with 1.9 L of sports drink (SD) (GatoradeR) and bisacodyl (B) is commonly used in outpatient practice for bowel preparation due to cited patient satisfaction and tolerability of this specific regimen. We aim to compare PEG-3350 (MiralaxR) with PEG-AA-based (MoviPrepR) in terms of efficacy, patient satisfaction, and the effects of these two regimen on serum electrolytes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a prospective, single-blinded, block randomized trial comparing single-dose PEG-3350+SD+B to split-dose 2-L PEG-AA in the outpatient endoscopy unit in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Basic metabolic profiles were checked on the day of randomization and on the day of procedure. Patients completed a survey on the day of procedure. Bowel preparation quality was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) by two endoscopists and a nurse present during the procedure. RESULTS: We randomized 150 patients (74 PEG-3350+SD+B and 76 PEG-AA). The PEG-AA group had significantly higher BBPS scores in the right colon by Endoscopist 1, Nurse, and Endoscopist 2 (p 0.005, <0.000, 0.001) and in the left and transverse colon by Nurse and Endoscopist 2 (p 0.004, 0.26, 0.000, 0.006). There was no statistically significant difference in patient satisfaction or change in serum electrolytes between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Use of single-dose PEG-3350+SD+B results in inferior bowel preparation for colonoscopy compared with split-dose PEGAA and does not provide any advantage in regards to patient satisfaction. We therefore recommend discontinuing the use of PEG 3350 for bowel preparation.