Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Opioids | Research

Prospective preference assessment for the Comparison of Analgesic Regimen Effectiveness and Safety in Surgery (CARES) trial

Authors: Brian Hyung, Mark C. Bicket, Richard Brull, Janneth Pazmino-Canizares, Didem Bozak, Karim S. Ladha

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Clinical trials face major barriers such as under-enrollment and selective enrollment, which threaten study completion and undermine validity and generalizability. Thus, we conducted a prospective preference assessment (PPA) prior to commencing the Comparison of Analgesic Regimen Effectiveness and Safety in Surgery (CARES) trial—a randomized controlled study comparing the outcomes of managing acute postoperative pain between opioid-sparing and opioid-based therapies. This PPA aimed to (1) determine the patients’ willingness to participate in the CARES trial, (2) identify the areas for improvement, and (3) assess the differences between willing and unwilling patients.

Methods

Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were recruited between August 2019 and February 2020 from two academic hospitals. A survey was administered to each patient consisting of (1) a vignette describing the trial, (2) an assessment of the patients’ understanding of the trial, (3) open-ended questions assessing the attitudes towards the trial, and (4) patient-completed questionnaires. Data were analyzed qualitatively with thematic analysis and quantitatively with the Wilcoxon signed-rank and chi-square tests.

Results

Forty-two patients were enrolled and grouped based on the 6-point Likert scale into willing (4–6, 71%) and not willing (1–3, 29%) to participate in the CARES trial. There were no significant differences with respect to all variables: age, education, sex, visible minority status, previous research, previous surgery, regular use of pain medications, surgical concerns, previous discussions on pain management, significant pain within the past 3 months, and significant use of pain medication within the past month. Factors that motivated participation were contributing to scientific research (45%), altruism (29%), and improving personal pain (24%). Common discouraging factors were negative perceptions of opioids (29%), side effects (21%), being blinded to the study medication (21%), and poor pain management (19%).

Conclusions

This PPA revealed that two key discouraging factors for patients were being blinded to the type of pain medication being taken and the potential for poor pain management as a consequence of participation. Modifications to improve patient acceptance of the CARES trial include ensuring sufficient rescue medicine and follow-up visits consistent with current standards of care for all patients, as well as patient education surrounding safe administration and side effects of the study medications.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
Metadata
Title
Prospective preference assessment for the Comparison of Analgesic Regimen Effectiveness and Safety in Surgery (CARES) trial
Authors
Brian Hyung
Mark C. Bicket
Richard Brull
Janneth Pazmino-Canizares
Didem Bozak
Karim S. Ladha
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06123-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Trials 1/2022 Go to the issue