Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Optimising informed consent for participants in a randomised controlled trial in rural Uganda: a comparative prospective cohort mixed-methods study

Authors: J. Ditai, J. Kanyago, M. R. Nambozo, N. M. Odeke, J. Abeso, J. Dusabe-Richards, P. Olupot-Olupot, E. D. Carrol, A. Medina-Lara, M. Gladstone, J. Storr, B. Faragher, A. D. Weeks

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Poor participant understanding of research information can be a problem in community interventional studies with rural African women, whose levels of illiteracy are high. This study aimed to improve the informed consent process for women living in rural eastern Uganda. We assessed the impact of alternative consent models on participants’ understanding of clinical trial information and their contribution to the informed consent process in rural Uganda.

Methods

The study applied a parallel mixed-methods design for a prospective comparative cohort, nested within a pilot study on the community distribution of an alcohol-based hand rub to prevent neonatal sepsis (BabyGel pilot trial). Women of at least 34 weeks’ pregnancy, suitable for inclusion in the BabyGel pilot trial, were recruited into this study from their homes in 13 villages in Mbale District. As part of the informed consent process, information about the trial was presented using one of three consent methods: standard researcher-read information, a slide show using illustrated text on a flip chart or a video showing the patient information being read as if by a newsreader in either English or the local language. In addition, all women received the patient information sheet in their preferred language. Each information-giving method was used in recruitment for 1 week. Two days after recruitment, women’s understanding of the clinical trial was evaluated using the modified Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) tool. They were also shown the other two methods and their preference assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Semi-structured interviews were administered to each participant. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and translated verbatim, and thematically analysed.

Results

A total of 30 pregnant women in their homes participated in this study. Their recall of the trial information within the planned 48 h was assessed for the majority (90%, 27/30). For all three consent models, women demonstrated a high understanding of the study. There was no statistically significant difference between the slide-show message (mean 4.7; standard deviation, SD 0.47; range 4–5), video message (mean 4.9; SD 0.33; range 4–5) and standard method (mean 4.5; SD 0.53; range 4–5; all one-way ANOVA, p = 0.190). The slide-show message resulted in the most objective understanding of question items with the highest average QuIC score of 100 points. For women who had been recruited using any of the three models, the slide show was the most popular method, with a mean score for all items of not less than 4.2 (mean 4.8; SD 0.6; range 4–5). Most women (63%, 19/30) preferred the slide-show message, compared with 17% (5/30) and 20% (6/30) for the standard and video messages, respectively. The reasons given included the benefits of having pictures to aid understanding and the logical progression of the information.

Conclusion

Our results from this small study suggest that slide-show messages may be an effective and popular alternative way of presenting trial information to women in rural Uganda, many of whom have little or no literacy.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN67852437. Registered on 18 March 2018.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST). National Guidelines for Research involving Humans as Research Participants, no. July. Kampala: UNCST; 2014. Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST). National Guidelines for Research involving Humans as Research Participants, no. July. Kampala: UNCST; 2014.
2.
go back to reference World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–4. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–4.
3.
go back to reference Okello G, et al. Challenges for consent and community engagement in the conduct of cluster randomized trial among school children in low-income settings: experiences from Kenya. Trials. 2013;14(1):142.CrossRef Okello G, et al. Challenges for consent and community engagement in the conduct of cluster randomized trial among school children in low-income settings: experiences from Kenya. Trials. 2013;14(1):142.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Williams BF, French JK, White HD. Informed consent during the clinical emergency of acute myocardial infarction (HER0-2 consent substudy): a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2003;361(9361):918–22.CrossRef Williams BF, French JK, White HD. Informed consent during the clinical emergency of acute myocardial infarction (HER0-2 consent substudy): a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2003;361(9361):918–22.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary D, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of Informed Consent: a New Measure of Understanding Among Research Subjects. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(2):139-47. Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary D, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of Informed Consent: a New Measure of Understanding Among Research Subjects. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(2):139-47.
6.
go back to reference Afolabi MO, Okebe JU, Mcgrath N, Larson HJ, Bojang K, Chandramohan D. Informed consent comprehension in African research settings. Trop Med Int Health. 2014;19(6):625-42. Afolabi MO, Okebe JU, Mcgrath N, Larson HJ, Bojang K, Chandramohan D. Informed consent comprehension in African research settings. Trop Med Int Health. 2014;19(6):625-42.
7.
go back to reference Hallinan Z, Forrest A, Uhlenbrauck G, Young S, McKinney R Jr. Barriers to Change in the Informed Consent Process: A Systematic Literature Review. Ethics Hum Res. 2016;38(3):1–10. Hallinan Z, Forrest A, Uhlenbrauck G, Young S, McKinney R Jr. Barriers to Change in the Informed Consent Process: A Systematic Literature Review. Ethics Hum Res. 2016;38(3):1–10.
8.
go back to reference Heerman WJ, White RO, Barkin SL, Heerman W. Advancing Informed Consent for Vulnerable Populations. Pediatr Perspect Pediatr. 2015;135(3). Heerman WJ, White RO, Barkin SL, Heerman W. Advancing Informed Consent for Vulnerable Populations. Pediatr Perspect Pediatr. 2015;135(3).
9.
go back to reference Synnot A, Ryan R, Prictor M, Fetherstonhaugh D, Parker B. Audio-visual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in clinical trials (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(5):1-138. Synnot A, Ryan R, Prictor M, Fetherstonhaugh D, Parker B. Audio-visual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in clinical trials (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(5):1-138.
10.
go back to reference Nishimura A, Carey J, Erwin PJ, Tilburt JC, Murad MH, Mccormick JB. Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14:28.CrossRef Nishimura A, Carey J, Erwin PJ, Tilburt JC, Murad MH, Mccormick JB. Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14:28.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Falagas ME, Korbila IP, Giannopoulou KP, Kondilis BK, Peppas G. Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand? Am J Surg. 2009;198(3):420–35.CrossRef Falagas ME, Korbila IP, Giannopoulou KP, Kondilis BK, Peppas G. Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand? Am J Surg. 2009;198(3):420–35.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Shiono YN, et al. Participants’ understanding of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) through informed consent procedures in the RCT for breast cancer screening, J-START. Trials. 2014;15:375.CrossRef Shiono YN, et al. Participants’ understanding of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) through informed consent procedures in the RCT for breast cancer screening, J-START. Trials. 2014;15:375.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Enama ME, Hu Z, Gordon I, Costner P, Ledgerwood JE, Grady C. Randomization to Standard and Concise Informed Consent Forms: Development of Evidence-Based Consent Practices. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012;33(5):895–902.CrossRef Enama ME, Hu Z, Gordon I, Costner P, Ledgerwood JE, Grady C. Randomization to Standard and Concise Informed Consent Forms: Development of Evidence-Based Consent Practices. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012;33(5):895–902.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kruse AY, et al. A Randomized Trial Assessing the Impact of Written Information on Outpatients’ Knowledge About and Attitude Toward Randomized Clinical Trials. Control Clin Trials. 2000;21(3):223–40.CrossRef Kruse AY, et al. A Randomized Trial Assessing the Impact of Written Information on Outpatients’ Knowledge About and Attitude Toward Randomized Clinical Trials. Control Clin Trials. 2000;21(3):223–40.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Bristol ST, Hicks RW. Protecting boundaries of consent in clinical research: Implications for improvement. Nurs Ethics. 2014;21(1):16-27. Bristol ST, Hicks RW. Protecting boundaries of consent in clinical research: Implications for improvement. Nurs Ethics. 2014;21(1):16-27.
16.
go back to reference Simon CM, Klein DW, Schartz HA. Interactive multimedia consent for biobanking: a randomized trial. Genet Med. 2016;18(1):57–64.CrossRef Simon CM, Klein DW, Schartz HA. Interactive multimedia consent for biobanking: a randomized trial. Genet Med. 2016;18(1):57–64.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Farrell EH, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of audio-visual information aids for informed consent for invasive healthcare procedures in clinical practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(1):20–32.CrossRef Farrell EH, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of audio-visual information aids for informed consent for invasive healthcare procedures in clinical practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(1):20–32.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and ICF. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2016. Kampala: Uganda and Rockville, Maryland, USA: UBOS and ICF; 2018. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and ICF. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2016. Kampala: Uganda and Rockville, Maryland, USA: UBOS and ICF; 2018.
19.
go back to reference Barrett D, Twycross A. Data collection in qualitative research. Evid Based Nurs. 2018;21(3):63–4.CrossRef Barrett D, Twycross A. Data collection in qualitative research. Evid Based Nurs. 2018;21(3):63–4.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative Methods for Health Research. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications; 2009. Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative Methods for Health Research. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications; 2009.
21.
go back to reference Gillies K, Entwistle V, Treweek SP, Fraser C, Williamson PR, Campbell MK. Evaluation of interventions for informed consent for randomised controlled trials (ELICIT): protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey. Trials. 2011;16(484):1-10. Gillies K, Entwistle V, Treweek SP, Fraser C, Williamson PR, Campbell MK. Evaluation of interventions for informed consent for randomised controlled trials (ELICIT): protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey. Trials. 2011;16(484):1-10.
22.
go back to reference Cervo S, et al. An effective multisource informed consent procedure for research and clinical practice: An observational study of patient understanding and awareness of their roles as research stakeholders in a cancer biobank. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14(1):30.CrossRef Cervo S, et al. An effective multisource informed consent procedure for research and clinical practice: An observational study of patient understanding and awareness of their roles as research stakeholders in a cancer biobank. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14(1):30.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Oduro AR, et al. Understanding and retention of the informed consent process among parents in rural northern Ghana. BMC Med Ethics. 2008;9:1–9.CrossRef Oduro AR, et al. Understanding and retention of the informed consent process among parents in rural northern Ghana. BMC Med Ethics. 2008;9:1–9.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Nehme J, El-Khani U, Chow A, Hakky S, Ahmed AR, Purkayastha S. The use of multimedia consent programs for surgical procedures: a systematic review. Surg Innov. 2013;20(1):13–23.CrossRef Nehme J, El-Khani U, Chow A, Hakky S, Ahmed AR, Purkayastha S. The use of multimedia consent programs for surgical procedures: a systematic review. Surg Innov. 2013;20(1):13–23.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Beardsley E, Jefford M, Mileshkin L. Longer Consent Forms for Clinical Trials Compromise Patient Understanding: So Why Are They Lengthening? J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(9):e13–4.CrossRef Beardsley E, Jefford M, Mileshkin L. Longer Consent Forms for Clinical Trials Compromise Patient Understanding: So Why Are They Lengthening? J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(9):e13–4.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Wade J, Donovan JL, Athene Lane J, Neal DE, Hamdy FC. It’s not just what you say, it’s also how you say it: Opening the ‘black box’ of informed consent appointments in randomised controlled trials. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(11):2018–28.CrossRef Wade J, Donovan JL, Athene Lane J, Neal DE, Hamdy FC. It’s not just what you say, it’s also how you say it: Opening the ‘black box’ of informed consent appointments in randomised controlled trials. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(11):2018–28.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Ssali A, Poland F, Seeley J. Volunteer experiences and perceptions of the informed consent process: Lessons from two HIV clinical trials in Uganda Ethics in Biomedical Research. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):1–14.CrossRef Ssali A, Poland F, Seeley J. Volunteer experiences and perceptions of the informed consent process: Lessons from two HIV clinical trials in Uganda Ethics in Biomedical Research. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):1–14.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Hardavella G, Bjerg A, Saad N, Jacinto T, Powell P. How to optimise patient and public involvement in your research: doing science. Breathe. 2015;11(3):223–7.CrossRef Hardavella G, Bjerg A, Saad N, Jacinto T, Powell P. How to optimise patient and public involvement in your research: doing science. Breathe. 2015;11(3):223–7.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Optimising informed consent for participants in a randomised controlled trial in rural Uganda: a comparative prospective cohort mixed-methods study
Authors
J. Ditai
J. Kanyago
M. R. Nambozo
N. M. Odeke
J. Abeso
J. Dusabe-Richards
P. Olupot-Olupot
E. D. Carrol
A. Medina-Lara
M. Gladstone
J. Storr
B. Faragher
A. D. Weeks
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-3030-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue