Understanding practice-based research participation: The differing motivations of engaged vs. non-engaged clinicians in pragmatic clinical trials

Abstract

Background/AimsPragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) represent an increasingly used strategy for “real-world” trials. Successful PCTs typically require participation of community-based practices. However, community clinicians often have limited interest or experience in clinical research. Many barriers to practice-based research have been described, but possible motivations to participate among community practices not active in research have not been well explored. The tendency is for researchers to assume similar motivations and priorities across all candidate practices. This is not necessarily the case. A better understanding of the range of reasons clinicians might see for participating in pragmatic trials could be key to promoting this type of practice-based research.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 clinicians and staff members. Half of the interviewees had experience doing practice-based clinical trials and half did not. Individuals in these two groups were also diversified in terms of their practice size and location. Participants were asked about motivations and barriers to doing practice-based research in the context of a planned osteoporosis pragmatic clinical trial. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed.ResultsBarriers identified for both experienced and not-experienced clinicians and staff members included: a lack of time, increased paperwork, disruption to work flows, and concern over practice finances. Similar findings have been reported in the US, UK, Europe, and Australia. However, regarding positive motivations of practices to participate, we found systematic differences in attitude between research-engaged and research-naïve practices that have not been previously reported. The research-experienced group offered a greater number and variety of reasons to take part than the not-experienced group. While both groups expressed motivations related to patient care, clinicians and staff members experienced in practice-based clinical trials were much more likely to cite intellectual, professional, and societal benefits not envisioned by the other group.ConclusionsWe conclude that clinicians not already participating in practice-based trials may have a narrower range of motivations than those already participating. The lack of a broader view of possible benefits to participation may also translate into more obdurate recruiting challenges. These results point to the need for recruitment, engagement, and messaging approaches differentially tailored to the needs and interests of non-participating practices.

Training Needs Assessment of Health Care Professionals in Reproductive, Maternal and Newborn Health in a Low-Income Setting in Tanzania

“…However, the ndings from other previous studies indicate a low self -assessed research capacity among nurses (30,31) and a need for training in research methods among nurses and other HCPs (30,32,33). In alignment with our study ndings, lack of research resources like time and funding were found to be the most commonly perceived barriers to undertaking research among practitioners in the UK ,USA and Bahrain (28,29,34), increased paper work and disruption to work ows (34) Overall, the perceived importance on the speci c tasks was positively correlated with the overall perceived performance of tasks related to RMNH services. Similarly, ndings of a study in South Africa indicated that, the more comprehensively professional nurses were trained, the more competent they felt, and they expressed more negativity towards their work if they perceived they were inadequately trained (36).…”

“…and lack of statistical support(29). Among the motivating factors for participating in research included providing bene ts to patients, hoping to create knowledge relevant for patient care, nding solutions to di cult health problems and as an opportunity for professional development among clinical staff(34) and research supportive environment such as a research mentor(35). Health care providers in clinical practice are in a unique position to identify health problems and propose relevant evidence based solutions through clinical research.…”

Systematic review of provider involvement in heart failure self‐care interventions

“…Most of the studies included a variety of healthcare professionals implementing and testing research hypotheses with participants; however, these studies did not contain a provider directly engaged in the patient's heart failure treatment/management. This may reflect the varied challenges for providers engaging in clinical research, including lack of time, resources and finances, internal validity threats, research relevance, and conflict of interest in everyday practice (Baumal et al., ; Ford & Norrie, ; Messner et al., ). Future studies need to explore barriers and participation of direct providers in research.…”

Embedding mentoring to support trial processes and implementation fidelity in a randomised controlled trial of vocational rehabilitation for stroke survivors

“…Mentors also supported OTs with coherence and cognitive participation, through advising on trial processes relating to trial documentation completion, contamination, and recruitment. Support with trial documentation completion appears a novel nding in research, noteworthy because complicated trial documentation has been cited a key barrier to clinicians participating in practice-based research (39,40). Incomplete or missing trial documentation could have in uenced accuracy of ndings from RETAKE's embedded economic and process evaluations.…”