Advancing patient-centered research practices in a pragmatic patient-level randomized clinical trial: A thematic analysis of stakeholder engagement in Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA).

BACKGROUND: Involving patient and community stakeholders in clinical trials adds value by ensuring research prioritizes patient goals both in conduct of the study and application of the research. The use of stakeholder committees and their impact on the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial have been underreported clinically and academically. The aim of this study is to describe how Study Advisory Committee (SAC) recommendations were implemented throughout the Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) trial. EMPallA is a multi-center, pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care of older adults with advanced illness. METHODS: A SAC consisting of 18 individuals, including patients with palliative care experience, members of healthcare organizations, and payers was convened for the EMPallA trial. The SAC engaged in community-based participatory research and assisted in all aspects from study design to dissemination. The SAC met with the research team quarterly and annually from project inception to dissemination. Using meeting notes and recordings we completed a qualitative thematic analysis using an iterative process to develop themes and subthemes to summarize SAC recommendations throughout the project's duration. RESULTS: The SAC convened 16 times between 2017 and 2020. Over the course of the project, the SAC provided 41 unique recommendations. Twenty-six of the 41 (63%) recommendations were adapted into formal Institutional Review Board (IRB) study modifications. Recommendations were coded into four major themes: Scientific, Pragmatic, Resource and Dissemination. A majority of the recommendations were related to either the Scientific (46%) or Pragmatic (29%) themes. Recommendations were not mutually exclusive across three study phases: Preparatory, execution and translational. A vast majority (94%) of the recommendations made were related to the execution phase. Major IRB study modifications were made based on their recommendations including data collection of novel dependent variables and expanding recruitment to Spanish-speaking patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an example of successful integration of a SAC in the conduct of a pragmatic, multi-center RCT. Future trials should engage with SACs in all study phases to ensure trials are relevant, inclusive, patient-focused, and attentive to gaps between health care and patient and family needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03325985, 10/30/2017.

Clinical research should involve patient and community stakeholder perspectives to make sure the study addresses questions important to the studied population. One way to do this is by creating a group of stakeholders who can advise on the conduct of a study. We assembled a Study Advisory Committee (SAC) for the Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) trial. The purpose of this clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care of older adults with advanced illness. This paper describes how the SACs involvement translated into direct impacts on the EMPallA trial. The trial research team held regular meetings with the SAC throughout the trial process. Their involvement led to many significant changes in the trial, such as  expanding recruitment inclusion criteria (Spanish-speaking patients), and including survey instruments to measure lonelines and caregiver burden. The SAC also devised strategies to overcome patient and caregiver recruitment and retention challenges, including the creation of patient-friendly materials and training for research coordinators. This study provides a successful example of how actively engaging patient and community stakeholders, through committee engagement, can promote patient priorities in all phases of a trial while facilitating patient recruitment and retention.

What's in This For You? What's in This For Me?: A Win-Win Perspective of Involving Study Advisory Committee Members in Palliative Care Research.

Study advisory committees (SACs) provide critical value to clinical trials by providing unique perspectives that pull from personal and professional experiences related to the trial's healthcare topic. The Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) study had the privilege of convening a 16-person SAC from the project's inception to completion. The study team wanted to understand the impact this project had on the SAC members. In this narrative, we use reflective dialogue to share SAC members' lived experiences and the impact the EMPallA study has had on members both personally and professionally. We detail the (1) benefits SAC members, specifically patients, and caregivers, have had through working on this project. (2) The importance of recruiting diverse SAC members with different lived experiences and leveraging their feedback in clinical research. (3) Value of community capacity building to ensure the common vision of the clinical trial is promoted.

Psychometric Properties of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General for Evaluating Quality of Life in Patients With Life-Limiting Illness in the Emergency Department.

Background: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) is a widely used quality-of-life measure. However, no studies have examined the FACT-G among patients with life-limiting illnesses who present to emergency departments (EDs). Objective: The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the FACT-G among patients with life-limiting illnesses who present to EDs in the United States. Methods: This cross-sectional study pooled data from 12 EDs between April 2018 and January 2020 (n = 453). Patients enrolled in the study were adults with one or more of the four life-limiting illnesses: advanced cancer, Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, or End-Stage Renal Disease. We conducted item, exploratory, and confirmatory analyses (exploratory factor analysis [EFA] and confirmatory factor analysis [CFA]) to determine the psychometric properties of the FACT-G. Results: The FACT-G had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.88). The simplest EFA model was a six-factor structure. The CFA supported the six-factor structure, evidenced by the adequate fit indices (comparative fit index = 0.93, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.92, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.05; 90% confidence interval: 0.04 - 0.06). The six-factor structure comprised the physical, emotional, work and daily activities-related functional well-being, and the family and friends-related social well-being domains. Conclusions: The FACT-G is a reliable measure of health-related quality of life among patients with life-limiting illnesses who present to the ED. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03325985.

Engagement, Advance Care Planning, and Hospice Use in a Telephonic Nurse-Led Palliative Care Program for Persons Living with Advanced Cancer.

Persons living with advanced cancer have intensive symptoms and psychosocial needs that often result in visits to the Emergency Department (ED). We report on program engagement, advance care planning (ACP), and hospice use for a 6-month longitudinal nurse-led, telephonic palliative care intervention for patients with advanced cancer as part of a larger randomized trial. Patients 50 years and older with metastatic solid tumors were recruited from 18 EDs and randomized to receive nursing calls focused on ACP, symptom management, and care coordination or specialty outpatient palliative care (ClinicialTrials.gov: NCT03325985). One hundred and five (50%) graduated from the 6-month program, 54 (26%) died or enrolled in hospice, 40 (19%) were lost to follow-up, and 19 (9%) withdrew prior to program completion. In a Cox proportional hazard regression, withdrawn subjects were more likely to be white and have a low symptom burden compared to those who did not withdraw. Two hundred eighteen persons living with advanced cancer were enrolled in the nursing arm, and 182 of those (83%) completed some ACP. Of the subjects who died, 43/54 (80%) enrolled in hospice. Our program demonstrated high rates of engagement, ACP, and hospice enrollment. Enrolling subjects with a high symptom burden may result in even greater program engagement.

Attitudes, perceptions, and preferences towards SARS CoV-2 testing and vaccination among African American and Hispanic public housing residents, New York City: 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: African American and Hispanic populations have been affected disproportionately by COVID-19. Reasons are multifactorial and include social and structural determinants of health. During the onset and height of the pandemic, evidence suggested decreased access to SARS CoV-2 testing. In 2020, the National Institutes of Health launched the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx)- Underserved Populations initiative to improve SARS CoV-2 testing in underserved communities. In this study, we explored attitudes, experiences, and barriers to SARS CoV-2 testing and vaccination among New York City public housing residents. METHODS: Between December 2020 and March 2021, we conducted 9 virtual focus groups among 36 low-income minority residents living in New York City public housing. RESULTS: Among residents reporting a prior SARS CoV-2 test, main reasons for testing were to prepare for a medical procedure or because of a high-risk exposure. Barriers to testing included fear of discomfort from the nasal swab, fear of exposure to COVID-19 while traveling to get tested, concerns about the consequences of testing positive and the belief that testing was not necessary. Residents reported a mistrust of information sources and the health care system in general; they depended more on "word of mouth" for information. The major barrier to vaccination was lack of trust in vaccine safety. Residents endorsed more convenient testing, onsite testing at residential buildings, and home self-test kits. Residents also emphasized the need for language-concordant information sharing and for information to come from "people who look like [them] and come from the same background as [them]". CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to SARS CoV-2 testing and vaccination centered on themes of a lack of accurate information, fear, mistrust, safety, and convenience. Resident-endorsed strategies to increase testing include making testing easier to access either through home or onsite testing locations. Education and information sharing by trusted members of the community are important tools to combat misinformation and build trust.