Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar;67(3):256-263.
doi: 10.1111/aas.14183. Epub 2022 Dec 28.

Patient and public involvement in contemporary large intensive care trials: A meta-epidemiological study

Stine Estrup  1 , Emily Barot  2 , Camilla Bekker Mortensen  1 , Carl Thomas Anthon  2 , Elena Crescioli  3 , Maj-Brit Nørregaard Kjaer  2 , Gitte Kingo Vesterlund  2 , Camilla Rahbek Lysholm Bruun  2 , Marie Oxenbøll Collet  2 , Bodil Steen Rasmussen  3 , Praleene Sivapalan  2 , Lone Musaeus Poulsen  1 , Morten Hylander Møller  2 , Anders Perner  2 , Anders Granholm  2
Affiliations

Patient and public involvement in contemporary large intensive care trials: A meta-epidemiological study

Stine Estrup et al. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2023 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Patient and public involvement in randomised clinical trials has received increased focus, including in intensive care trials, but the frequency, method and extent is unknown. This meta-epidemiological study investigated patient and public involvement in contemporary, large ICU trials.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed for large (≥225 randomised patients), contemporary trials (published between 1 January 2019 and 31 January 2022) assessing interventions in adult patients in ICU settings. Abstracts and full-text articles were assessed independently and in duplicate. Data were extracted using a pre-defined, pilot-tested data extraction form with details on trials, patient and public involvement including categories and numbers of individuals involved, methods of involvement, and trial stage(s) with involvement. Trials authors were contacted as necessary.

Results: We included 100 trials, with 18 using patient and public involvement; these were larger and conducted in more centres than trials without patient and public involvement. Among trials with patient and public involvement, patients (in 14/18 trials), clinicians (13 trials), and family members (12 trials) were primarily involved, mainly in the development of research design (15 trials) and development of research focus (13 trials) stages and mostly by discussion (12 trials) and solo interviews (10 trials). A median of 65 individuals (range 1-6894) were involved.

Conclusions: We found patient and public involvement in a fifth of large, contemporary ICU trials. Primarily patients, families, and clinicians were included, particularly in the trial planning stages and mostly through interviews and discussions. Increased patient and public involvement in ICU trials is warranted.

Keywords: clinical trial; community participation; critical care; patient participation; randomised controlled trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Boote J, Wong R, Booth A. ‘Talking the talk or walking the walk?’ A bibliometric review of the literature on public involvement in health research published between 1995 and 2009. Health Expect. 2015;18:44-57.
    1. Sacristán JA, Aguarón A, Avendaño-Solá C, et al. Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:631-640.
    1. Lloyd K, White J. Democratizing clinical research. Nature. 2011;474:277-278.
    1. Pii KH, Schou LH, Piil K, Jarden M. Current trends in patient and public involvement in cancer research: a systematic review. Health Expect. 2019;22:3-20.
    1. Schandl A, Falk AC, Frank C. Patient participation in the intensive care unit. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2017;42:105-109.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources