Improving understanding of clinical trial procedures among low literacy populations: an intervention within a microbicide trial in Malawi

BMC Medical Ethics

Francis Masiye³  Esther Munalula²  Douglas Wassenaar¹  Paul M Ndebele⁴ 

[1] University of KwaZulu Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa;University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia;College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi;HJF-DAIDS, NIAID, NIH, 6700A Rockledge Drive Room 42A193, Second Floor, Bethesda, MD, 20817, USA

关键词: Understanding;    Malawi;    Placebo;    Randomisation;    Intervention;    Informed consent;    Double-blinding;    Comprehension;    Assessment;   

Others  :  800014
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6939-13-29

 received in 2012-07-19, accepted in 2012-11-05,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The intervention reported in this paper was a follow up to an empirical study conducted in Malawi with the aim of assessing trial participants’ understanding of randomisation, double-blinding and placebo use. In the empirical study, the majority of respondents (61.1%; n=124) obtained low scores (lower than 75%) on understanding of all three concepts under study. Based on these findings, an intervention based on a narrative which included all three concepts and their personal implications was designed. The narrative used daily examples from the field of Agriculture because Malawi has an agro-based economy.

Methods

The intervention was tested using a sample of 36 women who had been identified as low scorers during the empirical study. The 36 low scorers were randomly assigned to control (n=18) and intervention arms (n=18). The control arm went through a session in which they were provided with standard informed consent information for the microbicide trial. The intervention arm went through a session in which they were provided with a narrative in ChiChewa, the local language, with the assistance of a power point presentation which included pictures as well as discussions on justification and personal implications of the concepts under study.

Results

The findings on the efficacy of the intervention suggest that the 3 scientific concepts and their personal implications can be understood by low literacy populations using simple language and everyday local examples. The findings also suggest that the intervention positively impacted on understanding of trial procedures under study, as 13 of the 18 women in the intervention arm, obtained high scores (above 75%) during the post intervention assessment and none of the 18 in the control arm obtained a high score. Using Fischer’s exact test, it was confirmed that the effect of the intervention on understanding of the three procedures was statistically significant (p=0.0001).

Conclusions

Potential trial participants can be assisted to understand key clinical trial procedures, their justification and personal implications by using innovative tailored local narratives.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Ndebele et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Brody H, Miller FG: The clinician-investigator: Unavoidable but manageable tension. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2003, 13:329-346.
• [2]Elbourne D, Snowdon C, Garcia C: Subjects may not understand concept of clinical trials. Br Med J 1997, 315:247.
• [3]Feartherstone K, Donovan J: Random allocation or allocation at random? Patient’s perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial. Br Med J 1998, 317:1177-1180.
• [4]Kerr C, Robinson E, Stevens A, Braunholtz D, Edwards S, Lilford RJ: Randomisation in trials: Do potential trial participants understand it and find it acceptable? J Med Ethics 2004, 30:80-84.
• [5]Pace C, Emanuel E, Chuenyam T, Duncombe C, Bebchuk JD, Wendler D, Tavel J, McNay L, Phanuphak P, Foster H, Grady C: The quality of informed consent in a clinical study in Thailand. IRB Ethics and Human Research 2005, 27:9-17.
• [6]Pucci E, Belardinelli N, Signorino M, Angeleri F: Patients’ understanding of randomised controlled trials depends on their education. Br Med J 1999, 318:875.
• [7]Stead M, Eadie D, Gordon D, Angus K: “Hello, hello – it’s English I speak”: A quantitative exploration of patients’ understanding of the science of clinical trials. J Med Ethics 2005, 31:664-669.
• [8]Yuval R, Halon D, Merdler A, Khader N, Karkabi B, Uziel K, Lewis B: Patient Comprehension and reaction to participating in a double-blind randomised clinical trial (ISIS-4) in acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:1142-1146.
• [9]Colletti AS, Heagerty P, Sheon AR, Gross M, Koblin BA, Metzger DS, Seage GR: Randomised controlled evaluation of a prototype informed consent process for HIV vaccine efficacy trials. Jaids 2003, 32:161-169.
• [10]Kass NE, Sugarman J, Medley AM, Fogarty LA, Taylor H, Daugherty C, Emerson MR, Goodman SN, Hlubocky FJ, Hurwitz HI, Carducci M, Goodwin-Landler A: An intention to improve cancer patients’ understanding of early-phase clinical trials. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 2009, 31:1-10.
• [11]Simes RJ, Tattersall MHN, Coates AS, Raghavan D, Solomon HJ, Smartt H: Randomised comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment of cancer. Br Med J 1986, 293:1065-1068.
• [12]Fureman I, Myers K, Mcllellon T, Metzger D, Woody G: Evaluation of a video supplement to informed consent: Injecting drug users and preventive HIV vaccine efficacy trials. AIDS Educ Prev 1997, 9:330-341.
• [13]Friedland B, Marumo PM, de Kock A, Skoler S, Ngcozela V, Monedi C, McGrory E, van de Wijgert J: Development of a recruitment video for a Phase III trial of Carraguard (abstract). International Conference on AIDS 2004, 15:15-16.
• [14]Agre P, Rapkin B: Improving informed consent: A comparison of four consent tools. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 2003, 25:1-7.
• [15]Ellis PM, Butow PN, Tattersall MHN: Informing breast cancer patients about clinical trials: a randomised clinical trial of an educational booklet. Ann Oncol 2002, 13:1414-1423.
• [16]Jimison H, Sher P, Appleyard R, Le Vernois Y: The use of multimedia in the informed consent process. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998, 5:245-256.
• [17]Wray RJ, Stryke JE, Winer E, Demetri G, Emmons KM: Do cancer patients fully understand clinical trial Participation? A pilot study to assess informed consent and patients expectations. J Cancer Educ 2007, 22:22-24.
• [18]Coyne CA, Xu R, Raich P, Plome K, Dignan M, Wenzel LB, Fairclough D, Haberman T, Schnell L, Quella S, Cella D: Randomised controlled trial of an easy to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:836-842.
• [19]Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, Pramanik S, Divers SG: Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998, 90:668-674.
• [20]Dunn LB, Lindamer LA, Palmer BW, Golshan S, Schneirderman LJ, Jeste DV: Improving understanding of research consent in middle-aged and elderly patients with psychotic disorders. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2002, 10:142-150.
• [21]Barnett K, Harrison C, Newman F, Bentley C, Cummins C: A randomised study of the impact of different styles of patients’ leaflets for randomised controlled trials on children’s understanding. Archives of Diseases in Childhood 2005, 90:1097-1098.
• [22]Kripalani S, Bengtzen R, Henderson LE, Jacobson TA: Clinical research in low-literary population; using teach back to assess comprehension of informed consent and privacy information. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 2008, 30:13-19.
• [23]Sastry J, Pistal H, Sutar S, Kapadia-Kundu N, Joshi A, Suryavanshi N, Bharucha KE, Shrotri A, Phadke MA, Bollinger RC, Shankar AV: Optimizing the HIV/AIDS informed consent process in India. BMC Med 2004, 2:28. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Cornelli A, Sorenson J, Bentley M, Henderson G, Bowling M, Nkhoma J, Moses A, Zulu C, Chilima J, Ahmed Y, Heilig C, Jamieson D, Van der Horst C: Improving participant understanding of informed consent in an HIV-prevention clinical trial: a comparison of Methods. AIDS Behaviour 2012, 16:412-421.
• [25]Juraskova I, Butow P, Lopez A, Seccombe M, Boyle F, McCarthy N, Forbes JF: Improving informed consent in clinical trials: successful piloting of a decision aid. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:1443-1444.
• [26]Dunn LB, Palmer BW, Keehan M: Understanding of placebo controls among order people with Schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 2006, 321:137-146.
• [27]Dunn LB, Jeste DV: Problem areas in the understanding of informed consent for research: study of middle-aged and older patients with psychotic disorders. Psychopharmacology 2003, 171:81-85.
• [28]Flory J, Emanuel E: Interventions to improve research participants understanding in informed consent for research- A systematic review. JAMA 2004, 292:1593-1601.
• [29]Ryan RE, Prictor MJ, McLaughing KJ, Hill SJ: Audiovisual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in research. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, 23:1. Art. No.: CD003717
• [30]Eder ML, Yamokoski AD, Wittman PW, Kodish ED: Improving informed consent: suggestions from parents of children with leukemia. Pediatrics 2007, 119:e849-e859.
• [31]Abrahams R: African folktales: Traditional stories of the black world. Pantheon Books, New York; 1983.
• [32]Szilard B: Folklore in Africa today. Current Anthropology 1984, 25:214-216.
• [33]Faden R, Beauchamp TL: Decision making and informed consent: a study of the impact of disclosed information. Soc Indic Res 1980, 7:313-336.
• [34]Tomamichel T, Sessa C, Herzig S, de Jong J, Pagani O, Willems Y, Cavalli F: Informed consent for phase I studies: evaluation of quantity and quality of information provided to patients. Ann Oncol 1995, 6:363-369.
• [35]Verheggen FW, van Wijmen FC: Informed consent in clinical trials. Health Policy 1996, 36:131-153.
• [36]Lindegger G, Milford C, Slack C, Quayle M, Xaba X, Vardas E: Beyond the checklist – Assessing understanding for HIV vaccine trial participation in South Africa. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome 2006, 43:560-566.
• [37]Lindegger G, Richter LM: HIV vaccine trials: critical issues in informed consent. S Afr J Sci 2000, 96:313-317.
• [38]Hellman S, Hellman DS: Sounding board: of mice but not men: problems of the randomised clinical trial. N Engl J Med 1991, 324:1585-1589.
• [39]Abdool Karim S, Richardson B, Ramjee G, Hoffman I, Chirenje Z, Taha T, Kapina M, Maslankowski L, Coletti A, Profy A, Moench T, Piwowar-Manning E, Mâsse B, Hillier S, Soto-Torres L, on behalf of the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 035 Study Team: Safety and effectiveness of BufferGel and 0.5% PRO2000 gel for the prevention of HIV infection in women. AIDS 2011, 25:957-966.
• [40]Cornelli AC, Bentley ME, Sorenson JE, Henderson GE: Using formative research to develop a context-specific approach to informed consent for clinical trials. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2006, 1:45-60.
• [41]Robinson ES, Kerr C, Stevens A, Lilford R, Braunholtz D, Edwards S: Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials. Soc Sci Med 2004, 58:811-824.
• [42]Robinson EJ, Kerr CE, Stevens AJ, Lilford RJ, Braunholt DA, Edward SJ, Beck SR, Rowley MG: Lay publics’ understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Asses 2005, 9:1-192.