The future of research: Participant perspectives on remote trial delivery

Poster ID
1937
Authors' names
W Milczanowska1; RCE Bowyer2,3; MP García2; S Wadge2; AF Baleanu2; A Nessa2; A Sheedy2; G Akdag2; D Hart2; K Whelan4; CJ Steves2; M Ni Lochlainn2
Author's provenances
1. King’s College London 2. King’s College London, Department of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology 3. The Alan Turing Institute 4. King’s College London, Department of Nutritional Sciences

Abstract

Introduction

The PROMOTe trial was conducted entirely remotely, which aimed to enable a wider recruitment of participants, minimise risk of Covid-19 exposure and adhere to former travel restrictions. Participant experiences with remote clinical trials are not well understood. This work aimed to characterise participant perspectives on the remote delivery of the PROMOTe trial.

 

Methods

The trial involved remote measurement of short physical performance battery and grip strength, and remote collection of stool, urine, saliva, and capillary blood. Equipment including a dynamometer was posted to participants. Participants returned biological samples by post. A mixed methods approach was used, whereby participants were invited to complete an online questionnaire consisting of Likert, multiple-choice and open-ended questions upon trial completion.

 

Results

Of 72 trial participants, mean age 73.1, 80.6% (n = 58) completed the questionnaire. 53.5% (n = 31) had no preference between remote or in-person participation. Of those who preferred to take part remotely, 57.1% (n = 4) stated this was because there was no need to travel. 57.1% (n = 12) of those who preferred to take part in-person stated this was because they preferred to talk to the staff and ask questions face-to-face. Participants found that taking 5 out of the 8 physical measures were of similar difficulty over video teleconferencing compared to in-person. 100% (n = 58) of participants found it “easy” or “average” to collect stool, urine, and saliva, while 63.2% (n = 36) of participants thought it was “easy” or “average” to collect capillary blood. All participants found packaging and returning all four sample types of “easy” or “average” difficulty.

 

Conclusion

These findings suggest that the majority of participants found remote trial delivery, including handling equipment and collecting biological samples, both acceptable and manageable. Remote trial delivery has potential for increasing access of older people to trial participation.

Presentation