A qualitative study of facilitators of medication adherence in systemic lupus erythematosus: Perspectives from rheumatology providers/staff and patients.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disproportionately affects patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. Medication adherence is lower among these patient populations, and nonadherence is associated with worse health outcomes. We aimed to identify factors that enable adherence to immunosuppressive medications among patients with SLE from racial and ethnic minority groups. METHODS: Using a qualitative descriptive study design, we conducted in-depth interviews with purposefully selected (1) patients with SLE from racial and ethnic minority groups who were taking immunosuppressants and (2) lupus providers and staff. We focused on adherence facilitators, asking patients to describe approaches supporting adherence and for overcoming common adherence challenges and providers and staff to describe actions they can take to foster patient adherence. We used applied thematic analysis and categorized themes using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior (COM-B) model. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 patients (4 adherent and 8 nonadherent based on medication possession ratio) and 12 providers and staff. Although each patient described a unique set of facilitators, patients most often described social support, physical well-being, reminders, and ability to acquire medications as facilitators. Providers also commonly mentioned reminders and easy medication access as facilitators as well as patient education/communication and empowerment. CONCLUSION: Using an established behavioral change model, we categorized a breadth of adherence facilitators within each domain of the COM-B model while highlighting patients' individual approaches. Our findings suggest that an optimal adherence intervention may require a multi-modal and individually tailored approach including components from each behavioral domain-ensuring medication access (Capability) and utilizing reminders and social support (Opportunity), while coupled with internal motivation through improved communication and empowerment (Motivation).

Patient and Physician Perspectives of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Flare: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares are associated with increased damage and decreased health-related quality of life. We hypothesized that there is discordance between physicians' and patients' views of SLE flare. In this study, we aimed to explore patient and physician descriptions of SLE flares. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews with a purposeful sample of patients with SLE (who met 1997 American College of Rheumatology or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria) and practicing rheumatologists. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: Forty-two patient participants with SLE, representing a range of SLE activity, completed interviews. The majority described flare symptoms as joint pain, fatigue, and skin issues lasting several days. Few included objective signs or laboratory measures, when available, as features of flare. We interviewed 13 rheumatologists from 10 academic and 3 community settings. The majority defined flare as increased or worsening SLE disease activity, with slightly more than half requiring objective findings. Around half of the rheumatologists included fatigue, pain, or other patient-reported symptoms. CONCLUSION: Patients and physicians described flare differently. Participants with SLE perceived flares as several days of fatigue, pain, and skin issues. Providers defined flares as periods of increased clinical SLE activity. Our findings suggest the current definition of flare may be insufficient to integrate both perceptions. Further study is needed to understand the pathophysiology of patient flares and the best way to incorporate patients' perspectives into clinical assessments.

How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints.

Introduction: Digital health technologies (DHTs) provide opportunities for real-time data collection and assessment of patient function. However, use of DHT-derived endpoints in clinical trials to support medical product labelling claims is limited. Methods: From November 2020 through March 2021, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) conducted a qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews with sponsors of clinical trials that used DHT-derived endpoints. We aimed to learn about their experiences, including their interactions with regulators and the challenges they encountered. Using applied thematic analysis, we identified barriers to and recommendations for using DHT-derived endpoints in pivotal trials. Results: Sponsors identified five key challenges to incorporating DHT-derived endpoints in clinical trials. These included (1) a need for additional regulatory clarity specific to DHT-derived endpoints, (2) the official clinical outcome assessment qualification process being impractical for the biopharmaceutical industry, (3) a lack of comparator clinical endpoints, (4) a lack of validated DHTs and algorithms for concepts of interest, and (5) a lack of operational support from DHT vendors. Discussion/Conclusion: CTTI shared the interview findings with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and during a multi-stakeholder expert meeting. Based on these discussions, we provide several new and revised tools to aid sponsors in using DHT-derived endpoints in pivotal trials to support labelling claims.

Patients' Experiences With the Removal of a Ureteral Stent: Insights From In-depth Interviews With Participants in the USDRN STENTS Qualitative Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the experiences of patients undergoing stent removal in the USDRN Study to Enhance Understanding of Stent-Associated Symptoms (STENTS), a prospective, observational cohort study of patients with short-term ureteral stent placement post-ureteroscopy. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews. Participants reflected on (1) painful or bothersome aspects of stent removal, (2) symptoms immediately after removal, and (3) symptoms in the days following removal. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: The 38 participants interviewed were aged 13-77 years, 55% female, and 95% White. Interviews were conducted 7-30 days after stent removal. Almost all participants (n = 31) described that they experienced either pain or discomfort during stent removal, but for most (n = 25) pain was of short duration. Many participants (n = 21) described anticipatory anxiety related to the procedure, and several (n = 11) discussed discomfort arising from lack of privacy or feeling exposed. Interactions with medical providers often helped put participants at ease, but also increased discomfort for some. Following stent removal, several participants described lingering pain and/or urinary symptoms, but these largely resolved within 24 hours. A few participants described symptoms persisting for more than a day post stent removal. CONCLUSION: These findings on patients' experiences during and shortly after ureteral stent removal, particularly the psychological distress they experienced, identify opportunities for improvement in patient care. Clear communication from providers about what to expect with the removal procedure, and the possibility of delayed pain, may help patients adapt to discomfort.

Patient perspectives on considerations, tradeoffs, and experiences with multiple myeloma treatment selection: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Advances in multiple myeloma treatment and a proliferation of treatment options have resulted in improved survival rates and periods of symptom-free remission for many multiple myeloma patients. As a result, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) concerns related to myeloma treatments have become increasingly salient for this patient population and represent an important consideration guiding patients' treatment choices. To gain an understanding of patients' experiences with choosing myeloma therapies and explore the HRQoL concerns that are most important to them, we interviewed a diverse sample of US-based multiple myeloma patients about their treatment considerations. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews. Participants reflected on (1) the factors that were most important to them when thinking about multiple myeloma treatment and how these have changed over time, (2) how they might weigh the importance of treatment efficacy vs. side effects, (3) trade-offs they would be willing to make regarding efficacy vs. HRQoL, and (4) treatment changes they had experienced. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and narratives were analyzed using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 21 patients, heterogeneous in their disease trajectory and treatment experience. Participants were 36 to 78 years, 52% female, and 38% Black. Efficacy was named as the most important treatment consideration by almost two-thirds of participants, and over half also valued HRQoL aspects such as the ability to maintain daily functioning and enjoyment of life. Participants expressed concern about potential treatment side effects and preferred more convenient treatment options. Although participants stated largely trusting their clinicians' treatment recommendations, many said they would stop a clinician-recommended treatment if it negatively impacted their HRQoL. Participants also said that while they prioritized treatment efficacy, they would be willing to change to a less efficacious treatment if side effects became intolerable. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings link to other reports reflecting considerations that are important to multiple myeloma patients, including the importance placed on increasing life expectancy and progression-free survival, but also the tension between treatment efficacy and quality of life. Our results extend these findings to a racially diverse US-based patient population at different stages in the disease trajectory.

Stakeholders' views on the most and least helpful aspects of the ICH E6 GCP guideline and their aspirations for the revision of ICH E6(R2).

Background: The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) has published the ICH E6(R2) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guideline, which provides standards for the design, conduct, documentation, and reporting of clinical trials. Revision to E6(R2) is currently underway, aiming to adapt the guidance to the current regulatory environment. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) interviewed stakeholders, gathering their experiences implementing ICH E6 GCP and suggestions for revising the guidance. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews. Participants were purposefully selected to ensure diversity in geography, research role, and type of institution. Participants reflected on their aspirations for the ICH E6 GCP revision and described sections of the guidance that they found most and least helpful. Narratives were analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Results: Many participants found ICH E6 GCP generally clear and helpful. They appreciated that the guidance is globally accepted and serves as a common standard for research worldwide. Participants also noted opportunities for improvement, suggesting that the revised guidance should incorporate flexibility, simplify requirements, and accommodate advances in research conduct. They highlighted areas where language should be updated and concepts clarified and expressed a desire for transparency and inclusiveness in the revision process. Conclusion: Our findings show that many participants view the ICH E6(R2) guidance as helpful overall, although substantial room for improvement remains. We have provided the full report of these findings to ICH in hopes that it will be useful as the E6 GCP guideline is revised.

Initial Content Validation and Roadmap for a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Pain Intensity.

Measures of pain intensity (eg, numeric rating scales [NRS]) are widely used in clinical research and practice. While these measures have evidence for validity and reliability, poor standardization of instructions, and response options limits precision of pain assessment, allows for inconsistency in interpretation, and presents a challenge for comparison and aggregation of study results. Despite these pitfalls, the 0 to 10 NRS remains the most commonly used primary outcome measure in clinical trials of pain treatments and is the core measure recommended by regulatory agencies. The purpose of this study was to describe the first phase in the development of a pain intensity measure that is easily interpretable, psychometrically sound, and that adheres to FDA qualification processes. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial, Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership conducted concept elicitation interviews (N = 44; 22 with acute pain; 22 with chronic pain) to understand the patient perspective on rating pain intensity and to identify actionable suggestions for improved clarity and meaningfulness of instructions, recall periods, and response options. This article summarizes interview findings, describes how patient input and FDA feedback informed preliminary candidate measures, and provides an overview of the FDA qualification process. PERSPECTIVE: Concept elicitation interviews informed the development of content-valid candidate measures of acute and chronic pain intensity for planned use in clinical trials of pain treatments, and comprise the initial stage in FDA clinical outcome assessment qualification. Measures will subsequently be evaluated through cognitive interviews and a series of psychometric studies.

A Qualitative Study Documenting Black Birthing Individuals' Perspectives on the Disproportionate Rate of Preterm Birth in the Black Community.

Background: Compared with all other racial and ethnic groups, the rate of preterm birth (PTB) is 50% higher among non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB). There are limited published data focused on the etiology of the racial disparity in PTB from the perspective of Black birthing individuals who have had a lived experience with PTB. Methods: To gain insights into the etiology of the race disparity in PTB from the NHB patient's perspective, we conducted a qualitative descriptive study with NHBs who have a history of PTB. We conducted both focus group discussions (FGDs), in-depth interviews (IDIs), and used applied thematic analysis to analyze the data. Results: Seven individuals participated in 3 FGDs and 15 individuals participated in an IDI. The majority of participants named stress as a contributor to PTB among NHBs. Participants described that stress becomes an ongoing cycle with a cumulative effect on health. Three primary sources of stress were identified: (1) individual including stress from lack of personal wellness, (2) relational stress from intimate partner and familial relationships, and (3) community-level stress from occupations and societal expectations. Conclusion: Uncovering NHB patient's perspectives on the etiology of PTB is a critical step to develop interventions that mitigate the disparity impacting the Black community. Our findings suggest that multilevel interventions targeting individual-, relational-, and community-level stress may be necessary to reduce rates of PTB among NHB individuals.

Perspectives of HIV specialists and cardiologists on the specialty referral process for people living with HIV: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiology care may be beneficial for risk factor management in people living with HIV (PLWH), yet limited information is available about the referral process from the perspectives of HIV specialists and cardiologists. METHODS: We conducted 28 qualitative interviews at academic medical centers in the United States from December 2019 to February 2020 using components of the Specialty Referral Process Framework: referral decision, entry into referral care, and care integration. We analyzed the data using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: Reasons for cardiology referral most commonly included secondary prevention, uncontrolled risk factors, cardiac symptoms, and medication management. Facilitators in the referral process included ease of referral, personal relationships between HIV specialists and cardiologists, and close proximity of the clinic to the patient's home. Barriers included lack of transportation, transportation costs, insurance coverage gaps, stigma, and patient reluctance. CONCLUSIONS: Our results will inform future studies on implementation strategies aimed at improving the specialty referral process for PLWH. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04025125 .

Barriers to Taking Medications for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Qualitative Study of Racial Minority Patients, Lupus Providers, and Clinic Staff.

OBJECTIVE: Underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Racial and ethnic minorities also have more severe SLE manifestations that require use of immunosuppressive medications, and often have lower rates of medication adherence. We aimed to explore barriers of adherence to SLE immunosuppressive medications among minority SLE patients. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of racial minority SLE patients taking oral immunosuppressants (methotrexate, azathioprine, or mycophenolate), and lupus clinic providers and staff. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. We grouped themes using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior conceptual model. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 SLE patients (4 adherent, 8 nonadherent) and 12 providers and staff. We identified capability barriers to include external factors related to acquiring medications, specifically cost-, pharmacy-, and clinic-related issues; opportunity barriers to include external barriers to taking medications, specifically logistic- and medication-related issues; and motivation factors to include intrinsic barriers, encompassing patients' knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and physical and mental health. The most frequently described barriers were cost, side effects, busyness/forgetting, and lack of understanding, although barriers differed by patient and adherence level, with logistic and intrinsic barriers described predominantly by nonadherent patients and side effects described predominantly by adherent patients. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that interventions may be most impactful if they are designed to facilitate logistics of taking medications and increase patients' motivation while allowing for personalization to address the individual differences in adherence barriers.

Stakeholders' recommendations for revising Good Clinical Practice.

The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) is revising ICH E6 Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) initiated a project to identify and provide ICH with stakeholders' priority areas and suggestions for revising ICH E6 GCP. We conducted a global online survey to identify areas of ICH E6 GCP that are and are not in need of revision. A total of 327 stakeholders completed the survey. Stakeholders represent many research roles and types of organizations, are employed in 39 countries, and conduct research in 153 countries. The ICH E6 GCP principles mentioned most often (range, 25%-29%) in need of revision were implementing systems that assure quality, providing medical care by qualified physicians/dentists, protecting confidentiality and privacy, obtaining informed consent, and documenting and storing information. The Investigator section (n = 244, 75%) and Sponsor section (n = 242, 74%) of ICH E6 GCP were identified as needing the most revision and the Investigator Brochure section (n = 166, 51%) as needing the least revision. The topic most frequently mentioned as needing revision is Monitoring (n = 146; 45%) in the Sponsor section. Although none of the principles or topics in ICH E6 GCP were identified as needing revision by the majority of stakeholders, a meaningful percentage of stakeholders identified areas that they believe need revision. These findings, which represent the views of a wide variety of stakeholders, may be useful to ICH for identifying where specifically to focus their revision efforts. CTTI provided the final report to ICH with the project findings for their consideration.

Investigator Experiences Using Mobile Technologies in Clinical Research: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: The successful adoption of mobile technology for use in clinical trials relies on positive reception from key stakeholders, including clinical investigators; however, little information is known about the perspectives of investigators using mobile technologies in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to seek investigators' insights on the advantages and challenges of mobile clinical trials (MCTs); site-level budgetary, training, and other support needs necessary to adequately prepare for and implement MCTs; and the advantages and disadvantages for trial participants using mobile technologies in clinical trials. METHODS: Using a qualitative descriptive study design, we conducted in-depth interviews with investigators involved in the conduct of MCTs. Data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 investigators who represented a wide variety of clinical specialties and reported using a wide range of mobile technologies. Investigators most commonly cited 3 advantages of MCTs over traditional clinical trials: more streamlined study operations, remote data capture, and improvement in the quality of studies and data collected. Investigators also reported that MCTs can be designed around the convenience of trial participants, and individuals may be more willing to participate in MCTs because they can take part from their homes. In addition, investigators recognized that MCTs can also involve additional burden for participants and described that operational challenges, technology adoption barriers, uncertainties about data quality, and time burden made MCTs more challenging than traditional clinical trials. Investigators stressed that additional training and dedicated staff effort may be needed to select a particular technology for use in a trial, helping trial participants learn and use the technology, and for staff troubleshooting the technology. Investigators also expressed that sharing data collected in real time with investigators and trial participants is an important aspect of MCTs that warrants consideration and potentially additional training and education. CONCLUSIONS: Investigator perspectives can inform the use of mobile technologies in future clinical trials by proactively identifying and addressing potential challenges.

Pregnancy vs. paycheck: a qualitative study of patient's experience with employment during pregnancy at high risk for preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women with a history of preterm birth are at risk for recurrence, often requiring frequent prenatal visits for close monitoring and/or preventive therapies. Employment demands can limit uptake and adherence to recommended monitoring and preterm birth prevention therapies. METHOD: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using in-depth interviews (IDIs) of pregnant women with a history of preterm birth. IDIs were conducted by trained qualitative interviewers following a semi-structured interview guide focused on uncovering barriers and facilitators to initiation of prenatal care, including relevant employment experiences, and soliciting potential interventions to improve prompt prenatal care initiation. The IDIs were analyzed via applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: We described the interview findings that address women's employment experiences. The current analysis includes 27 women who are majority self-described as non-Hispanic Black (74%) and publically insured (70%). Participants were employed in a range of professions; food services, childcare and retail were the most common occupations. Participants described multiple ways that being pregnant impacted their earning potential, ranging from voluntary work-hour reduction, involuntary duty hour reductions by employers, truncated promotions, and termination of employment. Participants also shared varying experiences with workplace accommodations to their work environment and job duties based on their pregnancy. Some of these accommodations were initiated by a collaborative employee/employer discussion, others were initiated by the employer's perception of safe working conditions in pregnancy, and some accommodations were based on medical recommendations. Participants described supportive and unsupportive employer reactions to requests for accommodations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide novel insights into women's experiences balancing a pregnancy at increased risk for preterm birth with employment obligations. While many women reported positive experiences, the most striking insights came from women who described negative situations that ranged from challenging to potentially unlawful. Many of the findings suggest profound misunderstandings likely exist at the patient, employer and clinical provider level about the laws surrounding employment in pregnancy, safe employment responsibilities during pregnancy, and the range of creative accommodations that often allow for continued workplace productivity even during high risk pregnancy.

More than a box to check: Research sponsor and clinical investigator perspectives on making GCP training relevant.

BACKGROUND: Good clinical practice (GCP) training is the industry expectation for ensuring quality conduct of registrational clinical trials. However, concerns exist about whether the current structure and delivery of GCP training sufficiently prepares clinical investigators and their delegates to conduct clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 13 clinical investigators and 10 research sponsors to 1) examine characteristics of the quality conduct of sponsored clinical trials, including critical tasks and concerns perceived as essential for trial quality, 2) identify key knowledge and skills required to perform critical tasks, and 3) identify gaps and redundancies in GCP training and areas of improvement to ensure quality conduct of clinical trials. Data were examined using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: The top three tasks identified as critical for the quality conduct of clinical trials were obtaining informed consent, ensuring protocol compliance, and protecting participants' health and safety. Respondents acknowledged that GCP principles address each of these critical tasks but also described many challenges and burdens of GCP training, including high training frequency and repetitive content. Respondents suggested moving beyond GCP training as a mere check-box activity by making it more effective, engaging, and interactive. They also emphasized that applying GCP principles in a real-world, skills-based environment would increase the perceived relevance of GCP training. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that although investigators and sponsors recognize that GCP training addresses tasks critical to the quality conduct of clinical trials, the need for significant improvement in the design, content, and presentation of GCP training remains.

Consensus on Language for Advance Informed Consent in Health Care-Associated Pneumonia Clinical Trials Using a Delphi Process.

Importance: Information to be included in advance informed consent forms for health care-associated pneumonia treatment trials remains to be determined. Objective: To identify and determine how to describe information to be included in an advance informed consent form for an early-enrollment noninferiority hospital-acquired and/or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: A Delphi consensus process with stakeholders in HABP/VABP clinical trials was conducted using qualitative semistructured telephone interviews from June to August 2016, followed by 2 online surveys, the first from April to May 2017, and the second from September to October 2017. All stakeholders who participated in the interview were invited to participate in the first survey. Stakeholders who participated in the first survey were invited to participate in the second survey. Stakeholders were patients at risk of pneumonia, caregivers, representatives of institutional review boards, investigators, and study coordinators. Main Outcomes and Measures: Description and consensus of information to be included in advance informed consent forms for early enrollment in noninferiority HABP/VABP clinical trials. Results: Suggestions from 52 stakeholders about what key informed consent concepts to include and how to explain them were used to create 3 categories to be included in an advance consent form: (1) reassurances on patient health and treatment, (2) rationale for advance consent and early enrollment, and (3) an explanation of noninferiority. At the end of the Delphi process, at least 80% consensus was reached among the 40 stakeholders who participated in the second online survey on each of the statements to include in the proposed consent text. Throughout the process, however, describing and reaching consensus on statements about noninferiority was more problematic than the other categories. Conclusions and Relevance: The stakeholders endorsed consent language to be used in combination with a strategy for enrolling patients at highest risk for pneumonia before infection onset. Data-driven consent language may help potential participants make informed decisions about their involvement in clinical research and improve enrollment rates, which are necessary to evaluate new treatments and improve patient care. The proposed consent language may be adapted for other trials using an early enrollment strategy and for noninferiority trials.

Improving the quality conduct and efficiency of clinical trials with training: Recommendations for preparedness and qualification of investigators and delegates.

The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) Investigator Qualification Project addresses the need for a more efficient and effective means of identifying qualified clinical investigators and delegates. Selection of investigators and delegates who are qualified by training and experience to conduct clinical trials is essential to safeguarding protections for study participants and ensuring data quality and integrity. Sponsors generally document investigator qualification through training on the principles of good clinical practice (GCP), as defined by the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), adopted by regulatory authorities in the United States, Japan and the European Union. Although these GCP principles provide an important foundation for promoting the conduct of quality clinical trials, the industry standard "one-size-fits-all" GCP training may not fully prepare investigators and delegates for conducting quality clinical trials. Routine GCP training alone may not be sufficient to prepare an inexperienced member of a site team, while repeating such training is unlikely to enhance the qualifications of an experienced researcher. The CTTI project team used findings from qualitative research activities, as well as input from an expert meeting with multiple stakeholders, to identify gaps and redundancies in the current training of investigators and their delegates and recommend practical, action-based solutions. CTTI provides recommendations on how to implement a more efficient and effective means of preparedness and qualification of investigators and delegates, determining whether a site team is a good fit for a particular protocol, and improving the quality of clinical trial conduct.

Improving Uptake and Adherence to 17-Hydroxyprogesterone Caproate in Non-Hispanic Black Women: A Mixed Methods Study of Potential Interventions from the Patient Perspective.

Women with a history of a preterm birth (PTB) are at high risk for recurrence. Weekly 17-hydroxyprogestrone caproate (17-P) injections can reduce the risk of recurrence in women with prior spontaneous PTB. PTB occurs disproportionately in non-Hispanic black (NHB) women, and uptake and adherence to 17-P among NHB women are lower compared to women in other racial/ethnic groups. Evidence-based interventions to improve 17-P uptake and adherence that incorporate women's perceptions and preferences are needed. Our objective was to identify women's perspectives and preferences for interventions to promote uptake of and adherence to 17-P, particularly among NHB women. We conducted an exploratory sequential mixed methods study using focus group discussions (FGDs), a survey, and in-depth interviews (IDIs). We recruited women with a history of PTB who self-identified as NHB for the FGDs and IDIs. Survey participation was open to any woman with a history of PTB regardless of their race and ethnicity. Women could only participate in one of the three data collection activities. Transcripts from the qualitative focus groups and in-depth interviews were analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Descriptive statistics was used to analyze the quantitative survey. Eighty-two women participated in the study (FGDs [n = 7], surveys [n = 60], and IDIs [n = 15]). Suggested interventions were separated into two categories: (1) clinic-based interventions (i.e., interventions delivered during the clinical encounter) and (2) community-based interventions (i.e., interventions delivered outside of the clinical encounter). Clinic level interventions included improved clinic access and scheduling, same-day appointments, appointment reminders, making the clinic experience more comfortable for patients, and encouragement from providers. Interventions at the community level included increased 17-P awareness among support persons, employers, and community members and administration of 17-P outside the clinic setting. Our findings offer multiple potential interventions that could improve uptake of and adherence to 17-P for PTB prevention among NHB women. These proposed interventions have the potential to mitigate barriers to 17-P and narrow the disparity in PTB rates. Given the alarming and increasing rates of prematurity and PTB disparities, it is imperative to test, refine, and incorporate effective interventions into clinical practice. Our findings provide insights from patients that can help shape such interventions.

Exceptional Risk: Healthy Volunteers' Perceptions of HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials.

As with all early-stage testing of investigational drugs, clinical trials targeting HIV/AIDS can pose unknown risks to research subjects. Unlike sick participants seeking a therapeutic benefit, the motivations and barriers for healthy volunteers are more complex and understudied. Drawing on interviews and clinical trial data from 178 healthy volunteers, we examine how they perceive HIV/AIDS studies in the early stages of testing. A subset of healthy volunteers see phase I HIV/AIDS studies as particularly risky for reasons ranging from fear of catching the disease or having long-lasting and uncomfortable side effects to inexplicable fears that they cannot even articulate. Some participants have had past negative experiences in such trials that inform these views, but others cite information from staff and other participants as influential. Healthy volunteers' general fears concerning AIDS also shape their views of participating in phase I HIV/AIDS clinical trials.

Assessment of the Perceived Acceptability of an Early Enrollment Strategy Using Advance Consent in Health Care-Associated Pneumonia.

Importance: Better treatment options are needed in life-threatening infections, including health care-associated pneumonia. Enrolling patients in antibacterial clinical trials before diagnosis may circumvent existing time-to-enrollment constraints. However, the acceptability of an early enrollment strategy using advance consent is unknown. Objective: To assess the perceived acceptability of an early enrollment strategy for enrolling patients in an antibacterial clinical trial before a pneumonia diagnosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative, descriptive study used semistructured telephone interviews. Framed within a planned noninferiority pneumonia antibiotic trial, an early enrollment strategy was described and perceptions were assessed. Using this strategy, patients give consent to enroll before developing pneumonia, to be monitored by study staff, and to be randomly assigned a study antibiotic if pneumonia develops. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Fifty-two key stakeholders from across the United States, including 18 patients at risk of pneumonia, 12 caregivers, 10 representatives of institutional review boards, 7 investigators, and 5 study coordinators, were interviewed from June 20 to August 19, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perceived acceptability of the early enrollment strategy. Results: Among the 52 stakeholders interviewed (ages 29-75 years; 14 women), patients and caregivers expressed no concerns about patients being approached about participation before developing pneumonia; however, some patients may experience anxiety on learning about their risk for pneumonia. No concerns with study staff accessing patients' medical records were expressed. The clarity of consent information was important for understanding the study rather than having the condition under investigation. Among patients, caregivers, and institutional review board representatives, preferences varied regarding opt-out and precedent autonomy procedures. Nearly all patients would be willing to join a trial using the early enrollment strategy and caregivers would be willing to provide proxy consent. Institutional review board representatives were supportive of the strategy and made recommendations for the study protocol, primarily around informed consent. Investigators and study coordinators believed the strategy would not be burdensome and offered suggestions to ensure its feasibility. Conclusion and Relevance: Results of the study suggest that the early enrollment strategy is acceptable. Future research should evaluate whether the strategy improves enrollment rates in registrational pneumonia trials and in trials of other acute infection syndromes with narrow enrollment windows and/or patients with transient decisional incapacity.

Perceived control over condom use among sex workers in Madagascar: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Women's perceived control over condom use has been found to be an important determinant of actual condom use in some studies. However, many existing analyses used cross-sectional data and little quantitative information exists to characterize the relationships between perceived control and actual condom use among sex worker populations. METHODS: We assessed the association between measures of perceived condom use control and self-reported use of male condoms employing data from a longitudinal pilot study among 192 sex workers in Madagascar. RESULTS: In multivariable models, a lack of perceived control over condom use with a main partner and having a main partner ever refuse to use a condom when asked were both associated with an increased number of sex acts unprotected by condoms in the past week with a main partner (RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.21-2.85; RR 1.34; 95% CI 1.03-1.73, respectively). Conversely, no measure of condom use control was significantly associated with condom use with clients. CONCLUSION: Perceived control over condom use was an important determinant of condom use with main partners, but not clients, among sex workers in Madagascar. Programs working with sex workers should reach out to main and commercial partners of sex workers to increase male condom use.