使用关联初级医疗保健数据进行未来研究的重新联系同意书:ATHENA COVID-19 研究的结果和全科医生的看法

Kim Greaves, Amanda King, Zoltan Bourne, Jennifer Welsh, Mark Morgan, M. Ximena Tolosa, Trisha Johnston, Carissa Bonner, Tony Stanton, Rosemary Korda
{"title":"使用关联初级医疗保健数据进行未来研究的重新联系同意书:ATHENA COVID-19 研究的结果和全科医生的看法","authors":"Kim Greaves, Amanda King, Zoltan Bourne, Jennifer Welsh, Mark Morgan, M. Ximena Tolosa, Trisha Johnston, Carissa Bonner, Tony Stanton, Rosemary Korda","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.13.24311963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The ATHENA COVID-19 (ACV19) study was set up to recruit a cohort of patients with linked health information willing to be re-contacted in future to participate in clinical trials, and also to investigate the outcomes of people with COVID-19 in Queensland, Australia, using consent. This report describes how patients were recruited, their primary care data extracted, proportions consenting, outcomes of using the recontact method to recruit to a study, and experiences interacting with general practices requested to release the primary care data.\nMethods: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were systematically approached to gain consent to have their primary healthcare data extracted from their general practice into a Queensland Health database and linked to other datasets for ethically approved research. Patients were also asked to consent to allow future recontact to discuss participation in clinical trials and other research studies. Patients who consented to recontact were later approached to recruit to a long-COVID study. Patients general practices were contacted to export the patient files. All patient and general practice interactions were recorded. Outcome measures were proportions of patients consenting to data extraction and research, permission to recontact, proportions of general practices agreeing to participate. A thematic analysis was conducted to assess attitudes regarding export of healthcare data, and the proportions consenting to participate in the long-COVID study also reported. Results: Out of 1212 patients with COVID-19, contact details were available for 1155; 995(86%) were successfully approached, and 842(85%) reached a consent decision. Of those who reached a decision, 581(69%), 615(73%) and 629(75%) patients consented to data extraction, recontact, and both, respectively. 382 general practices were contacted, of whom 347(91%) had an electronic medical record compatible for file export. Of these, 335(88%) practices agreed to participate, and 12(3%) declined. In total 526 patient files were exported. The majority of general practices supported the study and accepted electronic patient consent as legitimate. For the long COVID study, 376(90%) of those patients recontacted agreed to have their contact details passed onto the long COVID study team and 192(53%) consented to take part in their study.\nConclusions: This report describes how primary care data was successfully extracted using consent, and that the majority of patients approached gave permission for their healthcare information to be used for research and be recontacted. The consent-to-recontact concept demonstrated its effectiveness to recruit to new research studies. The majority of general practices were willing to export identifiable patient healthcare data for linkage provided consent had been obtained.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"71 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consent to Recontact for Future Research Using Linked Primary Healthcare Data: Outcomes and General Practice Perceptions from the ATHENA COVID-19 Study\",\"authors\":\"Kim Greaves, Amanda King, Zoltan Bourne, Jennifer Welsh, Mark Morgan, M. Ximena Tolosa, Trisha Johnston, Carissa Bonner, Tony Stanton, Rosemary Korda\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.08.13.24311963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The ATHENA COVID-19 (ACV19) study was set up to recruit a cohort of patients with linked health information willing to be re-contacted in future to participate in clinical trials, and also to investigate the outcomes of people with COVID-19 in Queensland, Australia, using consent. This report describes how patients were recruited, their primary care data extracted, proportions consenting, outcomes of using the recontact method to recruit to a study, and experiences interacting with general practices requested to release the primary care data.\\nMethods: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were systematically approached to gain consent to have their primary healthcare data extracted from their general practice into a Queensland Health database and linked to other datasets for ethically approved research. Patients were also asked to consent to allow future recontact to discuss participation in clinical trials and other research studies. Patients who consented to recontact were later approached to recruit to a long-COVID study. Patients general practices were contacted to export the patient files. All patient and general practice interactions were recorded. Outcome measures were proportions of patients consenting to data extraction and research, permission to recontact, proportions of general practices agreeing to participate. A thematic analysis was conducted to assess attitudes regarding export of healthcare data, and the proportions consenting to participate in the long-COVID study also reported. Results: Out of 1212 patients with COVID-19, contact details were available for 1155; 995(86%) were successfully approached, and 842(85%) reached a consent decision. Of those who reached a decision, 581(69%), 615(73%) and 629(75%) patients consented to data extraction, recontact, and both, respectively. 382 general practices were contacted, of whom 347(91%) had an electronic medical record compatible for file export. Of these, 335(88%) practices agreed to participate, and 12(3%) declined. In total 526 patient files were exported. The majority of general practices supported the study and accepted electronic patient consent as legitimate. For the long COVID study, 376(90%) of those patients recontacted agreed to have their contact details passed onto the long COVID study team and 192(53%) consented to take part in their study.\\nConclusions: This report describes how primary care data was successfully extracted using consent, and that the majority of patients approached gave permission for their healthcare information to be used for research and be recontacted. The consent-to-recontact concept demonstrated its effectiveness to recruit to new research studies. The majority of general practices were willing to export identifiable patient healthcare data for linkage provided consent had been obtained.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.13.24311963\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.13.24311963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景ATHENA COVID-19 (ACV19)研究的目的是招募一批拥有相关健康信息的患者,这些患者愿意在未来被再次联系以参与临床试验,同时还希望通过征得同意的方式调查澳大利亚昆士兰州COVID-19患者的治疗效果。本报告介绍了如何招募患者、如何提取他们的基础医疗数据、同意的比例、使用重新联系方法招募患者参与研究的结果,以及与被要求发布基础医疗数据的全科医生互动的经验:我们系统性地联系了 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 12 月 31 日期间确诊为 COVID-19 的患者,以征得他们的同意,将他们的初级医疗保健数据从全科诊所提取到昆士兰卫生部的数据库中,并与其他数据集链接,用于伦理批准的研究。此外,还要求患者同意今后再次联系他们,讨论参与临床试验和其他研究的事宜。同意再次联系的患者随后会被邀请参加一项长期 COVID 研究。我们联系了患者的全科医生,以导出患者档案。所有患者与全科医生之间的互动均被记录在案。结果测量指标包括同意数据提取和研究的患者比例、同意再次联系的患者比例、同意参与的综合诊疗机构比例。还进行了专题分析,以评估对医疗保健数据输出的态度,并报告了同意参与长期 COVID 研究的比例。研究结果在 1212 名 COVID-19 患者中,有 1155 名患者的详细联系方式;995 名患者(86%)被成功联系,842 名患者(85%)做出了同意参与的决定。在做出决定的患者中,分别有 581 人(69%)、615 人(73%)和 629 人(75%)同意提取数据、重新联系或同时同意提取数据和重新联系。共联系了 382 家普通诊所,其中 347 家(91%)的电子病历可用于文件导出。其中 335 家(88%)诊所同意参与,12 家(3%)拒绝参与。总共导出了 526 份病人档案。大多数全科医疗机构都支持这项研究,并认为电子版患者同意书是合法的。在长期 COVID 研究中,376 名(90%)重新联系过的患者同意将他们的联系方式转交给长期 COVID 研究小组,192 名(53%)同意参加他们的研究:本报告介绍了如何通过同意的方式成功提取初级保健数据,并说明所接触的大多数患者都同意将其医疗信息用于研究并与之再次联系。同意再联系的概念证明了其在新研究项目中的有效性。在征得同意的情况下,大多数普通诊所愿意输出可识别的患者医疗保健数据以进行链接。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Consent to Recontact for Future Research Using Linked Primary Healthcare Data: Outcomes and General Practice Perceptions from the ATHENA COVID-19 Study
Background: The ATHENA COVID-19 (ACV19) study was set up to recruit a cohort of patients with linked health information willing to be re-contacted in future to participate in clinical trials, and also to investigate the outcomes of people with COVID-19 in Queensland, Australia, using consent. This report describes how patients were recruited, their primary care data extracted, proportions consenting, outcomes of using the recontact method to recruit to a study, and experiences interacting with general practices requested to release the primary care data. Methods: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were systematically approached to gain consent to have their primary healthcare data extracted from their general practice into a Queensland Health database and linked to other datasets for ethically approved research. Patients were also asked to consent to allow future recontact to discuss participation in clinical trials and other research studies. Patients who consented to recontact were later approached to recruit to a long-COVID study. Patients general practices were contacted to export the patient files. All patient and general practice interactions were recorded. Outcome measures were proportions of patients consenting to data extraction and research, permission to recontact, proportions of general practices agreeing to participate. A thematic analysis was conducted to assess attitudes regarding export of healthcare data, and the proportions consenting to participate in the long-COVID study also reported. Results: Out of 1212 patients with COVID-19, contact details were available for 1155; 995(86%) were successfully approached, and 842(85%) reached a consent decision. Of those who reached a decision, 581(69%), 615(73%) and 629(75%) patients consented to data extraction, recontact, and both, respectively. 382 general practices were contacted, of whom 347(91%) had an electronic medical record compatible for file export. Of these, 335(88%) practices agreed to participate, and 12(3%) declined. In total 526 patient files were exported. The majority of general practices supported the study and accepted electronic patient consent as legitimate. For the long COVID study, 376(90%) of those patients recontacted agreed to have their contact details passed onto the long COVID study team and 192(53%) consented to take part in their study. Conclusions: This report describes how primary care data was successfully extracted using consent, and that the majority of patients approached gave permission for their healthcare information to be used for research and be recontacted. The consent-to-recontact concept demonstrated its effectiveness to recruit to new research studies. The majority of general practices were willing to export identifiable patient healthcare data for linkage provided consent had been obtained.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of Monitoring and Evaluation Systems on the Performance of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Yumbe Regional referral hospital; A Pre-post quasi-experimental study design Plaintiff experiences of the medico-legal environment in Ireland “We’re here to help them if they want to come”: A qualitative exploration of hospital staff perceptions and experiences with outpatient non-attendance Improving Access and Efficiency of Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment Across Four Canadian Provinces: A Stepped-Wedge Trial I am a quarterback: A mixed methods study of death investigators' communication with family members of young sudden cardiac death victims from suspected heritable causes
×
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