Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

How context can impact clinical trials : a multi-country qualitative case study comparison of diagnostic biomarker test interventions

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Haenssgen, Marco Johannes, Charoenboon, Nutcha, Do, Nga T. T., Althaus, Thomas, Khine Zaw, Yuzana, Wertheim, Heiman F. L. and Lubell, Yoel (2019) How context can impact clinical trials : a multi-country qualitative case study comparison of diagnostic biomarker test interventions. Trials, 20 . 111. doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3215-9

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP-how-context-impact-trials-diagnostic-biomarker-test-Haenssgen-2018.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (1737Kb) | Preview
[img] PDF
WRAP-context-impact-clinical-trials-Haenssgen-2018.pdf - Accepted Version
Embargoed item. Restricted access to Repository staff only - Requires a PDF viewer.

Download (1440Kb)
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3215-9

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Background

Context matters for the successful implementation of medical interventions, but its role remains surprisingly understudied. Against the backdrop of antimicrobial resistance, a global health priority, we investigated the introduction of a rapid diagnostic biomarker test (C-reactive protein, or CRP) to guide antibiotic prescriptions in outpatient settings and asked, “Which factors account for cross-country variations in the effectiveness of CRP biomarker test interventions?”

Methods

We conducted a cross-case comparison of CRP point-of-care test trials across Yangon (Myanmar), Chiang Rai (Thailand), and Hanoi (Vietnam). Cross-sectional qualitative data were originally collected as part of each clinical trial to broaden their evidence base and help explain their respective results. We synthesised these data and developed a large qualitative data set comprising 130 interview and focus group participants (healthcare workers and patients) and nearly one million words worth of transcripts and interview notes. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify contextual factors and compare them across the three case studies. As clinical trial outcomes, we considered patients’ and healthcare workers’ adherence to the biomarker test results, and patient exclusion to gauge the potential “impact” of CRP point-of-care testing on the population level.

Results

We identified three principal domains of contextual influences on intervention effectiveness. First, perceived risks from infectious diseases influenced the adherence of the clinical users (nurses, doctors). Second, the health system context related to all three intervention outcomes (via the health policy and antibiotic policy environment, and via health system structures and the ensuing utilisation patterns). Third, the demand-side context influenced the patient adherence to CRP point-of-care tests and exclusion from the intervention through variations in local healthcare-seeking behaviours, popular conceptions of illness and medicine, and the resulting utilisation of the health system.

Conclusions

Our study underscored the importance of contextual variation for the interpretation of clinical trial findings. Further research should investigate the range and magnitude of contextual effects on trial outcomes through meta-analyses of large sets of clinical trials. For this to be possible, clinical trials should collect qualitative and quantitative contextual information for instance on their disease, health system, and demand-side environment.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT02758821 and NCT01918579.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Divisions: Faculty of Arts > School for Cross-faculty Studies
Faculty of Arts > School for Cross-faculty Studies > Global Sustainable Development
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): Clinical trials, Biochemical markers, Drug resistance in microorganisms
Journal or Publication Title: Trials
Publisher: Biomed Central
ISSN: 1745-6215
Official Date: 8 February 2019
Dates:
DateEvent
8 February 2019Available
19 January 2019Accepted
Volume: 20
Article Number: 111
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3215-9
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Open Access
RIOXX Funder/Project Grant:
Project/Grant IDRIOXX Funder NameFunder ID
UNSPECIFIEDFoundation for Innovative New DiagnosticsUNSPECIFIED
105605/Z/14/ZWellcome Trusthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269
105032/Z/14/ZWellcome Trusthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269
Global Antibiotic Resistance Partnership (GARP)Wellcome Trusthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269
UNSPECIFIED[UO] University Of Oxfordhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000769
UNSPECIFIEDResearch Councils UKhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000690
ES/P00511X/1[ESRC] Economic and Social Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000269

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item
twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us