"There was No Opportunity to Express Good or Bad": Perspectives From Patient Focus Groups on Patient Experience in Clinical Trials.

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Patient Experience Pub Date : 2024-03-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23743735241237684
Patrick Boyd, Elizabeth A Sternke, David J Tite, Kristopher Morgan
{"title":"\"There was No Opportunity to Express Good or Bad\": Perspectives From Patient Focus Groups on Patient Experience in Clinical Trials.","authors":"Patrick Boyd, Elizabeth A Sternke, David J Tite, Kristopher Morgan","doi":"10.1177/23743735241237684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To understand how patients perceive their experiences leading up to, during, and after a clinical trial, and the relationship these experiences had with future willingness to participate, we conducted 3 focus groups with patients who had prior clinical trial involvement (n  =  25). Discussion topics included clinical trial discovery, enrollment, communication, trust, patient-centricity, and future enrollment. Patient focus groups revealed a variety of motivations for enrolling in clinical trials (eg, altruism, efficacious treatment, curiosity, desperation, etc.). Patients learned about clinical trials through trusted sources (eg, primary care physicians, patient advocacy groups) and social media. Access and uncertainty about clinical trials were barriers to enrollment. Patient-centric communication and attention given to disease states and symptom severity were valued and made patients feel genuinely cared about. Post-trial follow up and being informed of trial results were inconsistently reported by patients. Critically, patients described frustration with an overall lack of patient experience measurement. Patients identified a need to measure experiences before, during, and after clinical trials and emphasized that doing so would facilitate patient trust and overall experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":45073,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Experience","volume":"11 ","pages":"23743735241237684"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10938610/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Experience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23743735241237684","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To understand how patients perceive their experiences leading up to, during, and after a clinical trial, and the relationship these experiences had with future willingness to participate, we conducted 3 focus groups with patients who had prior clinical trial involvement (n  =  25). Discussion topics included clinical trial discovery, enrollment, communication, trust, patient-centricity, and future enrollment. Patient focus groups revealed a variety of motivations for enrolling in clinical trials (eg, altruism, efficacious treatment, curiosity, desperation, etc.). Patients learned about clinical trials through trusted sources (eg, primary care physicians, patient advocacy groups) and social media. Access and uncertainty about clinical trials were barriers to enrollment. Patient-centric communication and attention given to disease states and symptom severity were valued and made patients feel genuinely cared about. Post-trial follow up and being informed of trial results were inconsistently reported by patients. Critically, patients described frustration with an overall lack of patient experience measurement. Patients identified a need to measure experiences before, during, and after clinical trials and emphasized that doing so would facilitate patient trust and overall experience.

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
"没有机会表达好坏":患者焦点小组对临床试验中患者体验的看法》(Perspectives From Patient Focus Groups on Patient Experience in Clinical Trials)。
为了了解患者如何看待他们在临床试验之前、期间和之后的经历,以及这些经历与未来参与意愿之间的关系,我们与曾经参与过临床试验的患者(25 人)进行了 3 次焦点小组讨论。讨论主题包括临床试验的发现、注册、沟通、信任、以患者为中心以及未来的注册。患者焦点小组的讨论显示,患者参与临床试验的动机多种多样(如利他主义、有效治疗、好奇心、绝望等)。患者通过可信来源(如初级保健医生、患者权益组织)和社交媒体了解临床试验。临床试验的可及性和不确定性是患者加入临床试验的障碍。以患者为中心的沟通以及对疾病状态和症状严重程度的关注受到重视,并让患者感受到真正的关怀。患者对试验后的随访和试验结果的告知情况的报告并不一致。重要的是,患者对整体缺乏患者体验测量表示失望。患者认为有必要对临床试验之前、期间和之后的体验进行衡量,并强调这样做将促进患者的信任和整体体验。
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
Journal of Patient Experience
Journal of Patient Experience HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
178
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluating Patient Experiences with Patient-Centered and Inclusive Care in Academic Obstetrics and Gynecology Outpatient Clinics. "It was not normal, and I had to find a doctor and tell him." Kenyan Women's Response to Cervical Cancer Symptoms. Factors Associated With Psychiatry Consultation for Musculoskeletal Trauma Patients. Does an "EZ" Survey Improve the Data Quality of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey 3.1? An Adaptive Pacing Intervention for Adults Living With Long COVID: A Narrative Study of Patient Experiences of Using the PaceMe app.
×
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