The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience

Louise Larkin, Tala Raad, Anusha Moses, Alexander Fraser, Stephen Gallagher, Bente Appel Esbensen, Liam Glynn, Anne Griffin, Audrey C Tierney, Norelee Kennedy
{"title":"The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience","authors":"Louise Larkin, Tala Raad, Anusha Moses, Alexander Fraser, Stephen Gallagher, Bente Appel Esbensen, Liam Glynn, Anne Griffin, Audrey C Tierney, Norelee Kennedy","doi":"10.12688/hrbopenres.13283.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<ns7:p>Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on clinical research. This paper aims to provide an insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic, associated public health restrictions and international guidance on the conduct of clinical research impacted two clinical rheumatology research trials - the Physiotherapist-led Intervention to Promote Physical Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PIPPRA) and the MEDiterranean diet in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MEDRA) projects. Methods The March 2019 public health restrictions imposed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 occurred at a time when PIPPRA was in the process of delivering assessment and intervention on a face-to-face basis (n=48) and MEDRA had commenced recruitment. Participants in PIPPRA and MEDRA had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, with some being immunosuppressed and thus at a higher risk for COVID-19. The decision-making processes of both trials is outlined to demonstrate the required amendments to continue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Amendments to PIPPRA and MEDRA trial protocols were agreed and received ethical and funder approval. Both trials switched from a face-to-face delivery to a telehealth using online platforms. The PIPPRA study was paused for five months (April-August 2020), resulting in n=33 (60%) negative deviations from assessment protocol. MEDRA switched from face-to-face to online recruitment with 20% (n=35/44) negative deviations in recruitment. Of the n=18 participants who consented to participating in a face-to-face trial, just n=2 (11%) opted to engage with telehealth delivery of the intervention. MEDRA assessment and intervention deviations were 100% as no sessions were completed as planned in 2020. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the PIPPRA and MEDRA clinical trials. Moving face-to-face clinical research to telehealth delivery may not be the panacea it is purported to be. Our experiences may be of benefit to researchers, clinicians, and funders in seeking to continue clinical research during a global pandemic.</ns7:p>","PeriodicalId":73254,"journal":{"name":"HRB open research","volume":"106 16","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HRB open research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13283.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on clinical research. This paper aims to provide an insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic, associated public health restrictions and international guidance on the conduct of clinical research impacted two clinical rheumatology research trials - the Physiotherapist-led Intervention to Promote Physical Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PIPPRA) and the MEDiterranean diet in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MEDRA) projects. Methods The March 2019 public health restrictions imposed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 occurred at a time when PIPPRA was in the process of delivering assessment and intervention on a face-to-face basis (n=48) and MEDRA had commenced recruitment. Participants in PIPPRA and MEDRA had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, with some being immunosuppressed and thus at a higher risk for COVID-19. The decision-making processes of both trials is outlined to demonstrate the required amendments to continue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Amendments to PIPPRA and MEDRA trial protocols were agreed and received ethical and funder approval. Both trials switched from a face-to-face delivery to a telehealth using online platforms. The PIPPRA study was paused for five months (April-August 2020), resulting in n=33 (60%) negative deviations from assessment protocol. MEDRA switched from face-to-face to online recruitment with 20% (n=35/44) negative deviations in recruitment. Of the n=18 participants who consented to participating in a face-to-face trial, just n=2 (11%) opted to engage with telehealth delivery of the intervention. MEDRA assessment and intervention deviations were 100% as no sessions were completed as planned in 2020. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the PIPPRA and MEDRA clinical trials. Moving face-to-face clinical research to telehealth delivery may not be the panacea it is purported to be. Our experiences may be of benefit to researchers, clinicians, and funders in seeking to continue clinical research during a global pandemic.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19对临床研究的影响:PIPPRA和MEDRA的经验
2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)对临床研究产生了重大影响。本文旨在深入了解COVID-19大流行、相关公共卫生限制和国际临床研究指导如何影响两项临床风湿病研究试验——物理治疗师主导的促进类风湿关节炎身体活动干预(PIPPRA)和类风湿关节炎地中海饮食(MEDRA)项目。方法2019年3月为降低COVID-19风险而实施的公共卫生限制发生在PIPPRA正在进行面对面评估和干预的过程中(n=48), MEDRA已经开始招募。PIPPRA和MEDRA的参与者被诊断为类风湿性关节炎,其中一些人免疫抑制,因此感染COVID-19的风险更高。本文概述了这两项试验的决策过程,以说明在COVID-19大流行背景下继续进行所需的修改。结果对PIPPRA和MEDRA试验方案的修改得到了同意,并获得了伦理和资金的批准。这两项试验都从面对面交付转变为使用在线平台的远程医疗。PIPPRA研究暂停了5个月(2020年4月至8月),导致n=33(60%)与评估方案负偏差。MEDRA从面对面招聘转向在线招聘,招聘负偏差为20% (n=35/44)。在同意参加面对面试验的n=18名参与者中,只有n=2(11%)选择参与远程医疗干预。MEDRA评估和干预偏差为100%,因为2020年没有按计划完成任何会议。结论新冠肺炎疫情严重影响了PIPPRA和MEDRA临床试验。将面对面的临床研究转移到远程医疗服务可能并不是所谓的灵丹妙药。我们的经验可能对在全球大流行期间寻求继续进行临床研究的研究人员、临床医生和资助者有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
A study to explore the role of a low threshold, fitness focussed physical rehabilitation intervention with protein supplementation to target physical function and frailty in people with problematic substance use and homelessness: protocol for a single-arm pre-post intervention study. Protocol for a systematic search and critical discourse analysis of research on national HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis programmes among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Altmetric coverage of health research in Ireland 2017-2023: a protocol for a cross-sectional analysis. Development and Initial Implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a Non-regulated Trial: a research note from the ReStOre II Trial. The emerging role of a Stroke Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) in Early Supported Discharged: Developing a pathway for stroke nursing for secondary prevention in the community.  A scoping review protocol.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1