Eborall Helen C, Dallosso Helen M, Daly Heather, Martin-Stacey Lorraine, Heller Simon R
Social Science Applied to Healthcare Improvement Research (SAPPHIRE) Group, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Trials. 2014 Jan 9;15:15. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-15.
In trials of behavioural interventions, the individuals who deliver the intervention are in a position of key influence on the success of the trial. Their fidelity to the intervention is crucial. Yet little is understood about the experiences of this group of trial personnel. This study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of educators who delivered a structured education intervention to people with type 2 diabetes, which incorporated training in self-monitoring of either blood glucose (SMBG) or urine glucose (SMUG) as part of a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Educators' views were explored through focus groups before and after training (N=18) and approximately 1 year into the trial (N=14), and semi-structured telephone interviews at approximately 2 years (N=7). Analysis was based on the constant comparative method.
Educators held preferences regarding the intervention variants; thus, they were not in individual equipoise. Training raised awareness of preferences and their potential to impact on delivery. Educators were confident in their unbiased delivery, but acknowledged the challenges involved. Concealing their preferences was helped by a sense of professionalism, the patient-centred nature of the intervention, and concessions in the trial protocol (enabling participants to swap monitoring methods if needed). Commitment to unbiased delivery was explained through a desire for evidence-based knowledge in the contentious area of SMBG.
The findings provide insight into a previously unexplored group of trial personnel--intervention deliverers in trials of behavioural interventions--which will be useful to those designing and running similar trials. Rather than individual equipoise, it is intervention deliverers' awareness of personal preferences and their potential impact on the trial outcome that facilitates unbiased delivery. Further, awareness of community equipoise, the need for evidence, and relevance to the individual enhance commitment to the RCT.
ISRCTN95696668.
在行为干预试验中,实施干预的个体对试验的成功具有关键影响。他们对干预的忠实度至关重要。然而,对于这组试验人员的经历却知之甚少。本研究旨在调查教育工作者的观点和经历,这些教育工作者对2型糖尿病患者实施了结构化教育干预,该干预在一项随机对照试验(RCT)中纳入了血糖自我监测(SMBG)或尿糖自我监测(SMUG)培训。
通过在培训前后进行焦点小组访谈(N = 18)、在试验进行约1年时进行焦点小组访谈(N = 14)以及在试验进行约2年时进行半结构化电话访谈(N = 7)来探究教育工作者的观点。分析基于持续比较法。
教育工作者对干预变体有偏好;因此,他们并非处于个体均衡状态。培训提高了对偏好及其可能影响实施的认识。教育工作者对无偏倚的实施充满信心,但也承认其中存在挑战。专业精神、干预以患者为中心的性质以及试验方案中的让步(使参与者能够在需要时更换监测方法)有助于隐瞒他们的偏好。通过在SMBG这一有争议领域对基于证据的知识的渴望来解释对无偏倚实施的承诺。
研究结果为行为干预试验中的一类此前未被探索的试验人员——干预实施者提供了见解,这将对设计和开展类似试验的人员有用。促进无偏倚实施的并非个体均衡,而是干预实施者对个人偏好及其对试验结果潜在影响的认识。此外,对群体均衡、证据需求以及与个体相关性的认识增强了对RCT的承诺。
ISRCTN95696668