Critical lessons from a pragmatic randomized trial of home-based COVID-19 testing in rural Native American and Latino communities.

PURPOSE: Native Americans and Latinos have higher COVID-19 infection and mortality rates and may have limited access to diagnostic testing. Home-based testing may improve access to care in rural and underserved populations. This study tests the effect of community health worker (CHW) support on accessibility, feasibility, and completion of COVID-19 home testing among Native American and Latino adults living on the Flathead Reservation in Montana and in Yakima Valley, Washington. METHODS: A two-arm, multisite, pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted using block randomization stratified by site and participant age. Active arm participants received CHW assistance with online COVID-19 test kit registration and virtual swabbing support. The passive arm participants received standard-of-care support from the kit vendor. Logistic regression modeled the association between study arm and test completion (primary outcome) and between study arm and test completion with return of valid test results (secondary outcome). Responses to posttest surveys and interviews were summarized using deductive thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Overall, 63% of participants (n = 268) completed COVID-19 tests, and 50% completed tests yielding a valid result. Active arm participants had higher odds of test completion (odds ratio: 1.66, 95% confidence interval [1.01, 2.75]). Differences were most pronounced among adults ≥60 years. Participants cited ease of use and not having to leave home as positive aspects, and transportation and mailing issues as negative aspects of home-based testing. CONCLUSIONS: CHW support led to higher COVID-19 test completion rates, particularly among older adults. Significant testing barriers included language, educational level, rurality, and test kit issues.

A pragmatic randomized trial of home-based testing for COVID-19 in rural Native American and Latino communities: Protocol for the "Protecting our Communities" study.

BACKGROUND: Home-based testing for COVID-19 has potential to reduce existing health care disparities among underserved populations in the United States. However, implementation of home-based tests in these communities may face significant barriers. This study evaluates the acceptability, feasibility, and success of home-based testing and the potential added benefit of active support from trusted community health workers for Native Americans and Hispanic/Latino adults living in rural Montana and Washington states. METHODS/DESIGN: The academic-community research team designed the trial to be responsive to community needs for understanding barriers and supports to home-based COVID-19 testing. The "Protecting Our Community" study is a two-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial in which a total of 400 participants are randomized to active or passive arms. Participants of both study arms receive a commercially available home collection COVID-19 test kit, which is completed by mailing a self-collected nasal swab to a central laboratory. The primary study outcome is return of the kit to the central lab within 14 days. The cultural, social, behavioral, and economic barriers to home-based COVID-19 testing are also assessed by qualitative research methods. A survey and semi-structured interviews are conducted after the trial to evaluate perceptions and experience of home-based testing. DISCUSSION: Implementing home-based testing in underserved populations, including among Native American and Hispanic/Latino communities, may require additional support to be successful. The Protecting Our Community trial examines the effect of trusted community health workers on use of home-based testing, which may be adaptable for community-driven models of home-based testing in other underserved populations.

Reframing Recruitment: Evaluating Framing in Authorization for Research Contact Programs.

BACKGROUND: The changing clinical research recruitment landscape involves practical challenges but introduces opportunities. Researchers can now identify large numbers of eligible patients through electronic health record review and can directly contact those who have authorized contact. Applying behavioral science-driven strategies to design and frame communication could affect patients' willingness to authorize contact and their understanding of these programs. The ethical and practical implications of various strategies warrant empirical evaluation. METHODS: We conducted an online survey (n = 1070) using a nationally-representative sample. Participants were asked to imagine being asked for authorization for research contact in clinic. They were randomly assigned to view one of three flyers: #1-neutral text flyer; #2-a positive text flyer; or #3-positive graphics-based flyer. Primary outcomes included likelihood of enrollment and comprehension of the program. Chi-Square tests and regression analyses were used to examine whether those who saw the positive flyers were more likely to enroll and had increased comprehension. RESULTS: Compared to the neutral flyer, individuals who received the positive text flyer were numerically more likely to enroll, but this was not statistically significant (24.2% v. 19.0%, p = 0.11). Individuals who received the positive graphics flyer were more likely to enroll (28.7% v. 19.0%, p = 0.002). After adjustment, individuals assigned to both novel flyers had increased odds of being likely to enroll (OR = 1.55 95%CI [1.04, 2.31] and OR = 1.95 95%CI [1.31, 2.91]). Flyer type did not affect overall comprehension (p = 0.21), and greater likelihood of enrollment was observed only in individuals with better comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that employing behavioral science-driven communication strategies for authorization for research contact had an effect on likelihood of hypothetical enrollment but did not significantly affect comprehension. Strategies using simple, positive language and visual tools may be effective and ethically appropriate. Further studies should explore how these and other approaches can help to optimize research recruitment.

Public attitudes toward an authorization for contact program for clinical research.

We conducted an online experimental survey to evaluate attitudes toward an authorization for contact (AFC) program allowing researchers to contact patients about studies based on electronic record review. A total of 1070 participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 flyers varying in design and framing. Participants were asked to select concerns about and reasons for signing up for AFC. Logistic regression and latent class analysis were conducted. The most commonly selected concerns included needing more information (43%), privacy (40%), and needing more time to think (28%). A minority were not interested in participating in research (16%) and did not want to be bothered (15%). Latent class analysis identified clusters with specific concerns about privacy, lack of interest in research, and not wanting to be bothered. A novel flyer with simple and positive framing was associated with lower odds of both not wanting to be bothered (P = .01) and not being interested in research (P = .01). Many concerns about AFC programs appear nonspecific. Addressing privacy, lack of interest in research, and not wanting to be bothered warrant further study as ways to enhance recruitment.

Feasibility of connecting regional research programs to national multisite trials emanating from the CTSA Trial Innovation Network.

A collaborative research model was developed and tested to enable regional healthcare systems to join multisite clinical trials emanating from the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Trial Innovation Network (TIN) by the Institute of Translational Health Sciences at the University of Washington and the Northwest Participant and Clinical Interactions (NW PCI) Network. The NW PCI is a collaborative group of regional research programs located at medical centers, healthcare systems, and universities across Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. This article describes the purpose, development, barriers, and initial experience with feasibility assessment for TIN-supported studies in the NW PCI. The tools and processes of the NW PCI Network were adapted to enable network sites to assess studies for clinical relevance and feasibility. Seven of seventeen TIN-supported studies were reviewed for consideration; three of which resulted in successful completion of study documentation for site selection by NW PCI sites. The NW PCI/TIN model can be adapted by other CTSAs to increase involvement of regional research programs in national multisite clinical research studies. Barriers to expanding TIN-supported trials to regional networks include short timelines for study document submissions, insufficient site reimbursement rates, and non-feasible study designs.