Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study

Abstract Background Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed breast reconstruction technique worldwide but the technique is evolving rapidly. High-quality evidence is needed to support practice. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the best evidence but can be...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gareth Davies, Nicola Mills, Chris Holcombe, Shelley Potter, on behalf of the iBRA Steering Group
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-04-01
Series:Trials
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4227-1
id doaj-830e86dac0cb458295c0210ae64c1ff5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-830e86dac0cb458295c0210ae64c1ff52020-11-25T02:32:59ZengBMCTrials1745-62152020-04-0121111110.1186/s13063-020-4227-1Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative studyGareth Davies0Nicola Mills1Chris Holcombe2Shelley Potter3on behalf of the iBRA Steering GroupBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical SchoolBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical SchoolLinda McCartney Centre, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University HospitalBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical SchoolAbstract Background Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed breast reconstruction technique worldwide but the technique is evolving rapidly. High-quality evidence is needed to support practice. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the best evidence but can be challenging to conduct. iBRA is a four-phased study which aimed to inform the feasibility, design and conduct of an RCT in IBBR. In phase 3, the randomisation acceptability study, an electronic survey and qualitative interviews were conducted to explore professionals’ perceptions of future trials in IBBR. Findings from the interviews are presented here. Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of 31 health professionals (HPs) who completed the survey to explore their attitudes to the feasibility of potential RCTs in more detail. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and data were analysed thematically using constant comparative techniques. Sampling, data collection and analysis were undertaken iteratively and concurrently until data saturation was achieved. Results Almost all HPs acknowledged the need for better evidence to support the practice of IBBR and most identified RCTs as generating the highest-quality evidence. Despite highlighting potential challenges, most participants supported the need for an RCT in IBBR. A minority, however, were strongly opposed to a future trial. The opposition and challenges identified centred around three key themes; (i) limited understanding of pragmatic study design and the value of randomisation in minimising bias; (ii) clinician and patient equipoise and (iii) aspects of surgical culture and training that were not supportive of RCTs. Conclusion There is a need for well-designed, large-scale RCTs to support the current practice of IBBR but barriers to their acceptability are evident. The perceived barriers to RCTs in breast reconstruction identified in this study are not insurmountable and have previously been overcome in other similar surgical trials. This may represent an opportunity, not only to establish the evidence base for IBBR, but also to improve engagement in RCTs in breast surgery in general to ultimately improve outcomes for patients. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN37664281 .http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4227-1Qualitative, randomised controlled trialsSurgeryImplant breast reconstruction
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gareth Davies
Nicola Mills
Chris Holcombe
Shelley Potter
on behalf of the iBRA Steering Group
spellingShingle Gareth Davies
Nicola Mills
Chris Holcombe
Shelley Potter
on behalf of the iBRA Steering Group
Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
Trials
Qualitative, randomised controlled trials
Surgery
Implant breast reconstruction
author_facet Gareth Davies
Nicola Mills
Chris Holcombe
Shelley Potter
on behalf of the iBRA Steering Group
author_sort Gareth Davies
title Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
title_short Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
title_full Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
title_fullStr Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study
title_sort perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? a qualitative study
publisher BMC
series Trials
issn 1745-6215
publishDate 2020-04-01
description Abstract Background Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed breast reconstruction technique worldwide but the technique is evolving rapidly. High-quality evidence is needed to support practice. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the best evidence but can be challenging to conduct. iBRA is a four-phased study which aimed to inform the feasibility, design and conduct of an RCT in IBBR. In phase 3, the randomisation acceptability study, an electronic survey and qualitative interviews were conducted to explore professionals’ perceptions of future trials in IBBR. Findings from the interviews are presented here. Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of 31 health professionals (HPs) who completed the survey to explore their attitudes to the feasibility of potential RCTs in more detail. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and data were analysed thematically using constant comparative techniques. Sampling, data collection and analysis were undertaken iteratively and concurrently until data saturation was achieved. Results Almost all HPs acknowledged the need for better evidence to support the practice of IBBR and most identified RCTs as generating the highest-quality evidence. Despite highlighting potential challenges, most participants supported the need for an RCT in IBBR. A minority, however, were strongly opposed to a future trial. The opposition and challenges identified centred around three key themes; (i) limited understanding of pragmatic study design and the value of randomisation in minimising bias; (ii) clinician and patient equipoise and (iii) aspects of surgical culture and training that were not supportive of RCTs. Conclusion There is a need for well-designed, large-scale RCTs to support the current practice of IBBR but barriers to their acceptability are evident. The perceived barriers to RCTs in breast reconstruction identified in this study are not insurmountable and have previously been overcome in other similar surgical trials. This may represent an opportunity, not only to establish the evidence base for IBBR, but also to improve engagement in RCTs in breast surgery in general to ultimately improve outcomes for patients. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN37664281 .
topic Qualitative, randomised controlled trials
Surgery
Implant breast reconstruction
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4227-1
work_keys_str_mv AT garethdavies perceivedbarrierstorandomisedcontrolledtrialsinbreastreconstructionobstacletotrialinitiationoropportunitytoresolveaqualitativestudy
AT nicolamills perceivedbarrierstorandomisedcontrolledtrialsinbreastreconstructionobstacletotrialinitiationoropportunitytoresolveaqualitativestudy
AT chrisholcombe perceivedbarrierstorandomisedcontrolledtrialsinbreastreconstructionobstacletotrialinitiationoropportunitytoresolveaqualitativestudy
AT shelleypotter perceivedbarrierstorandomisedcontrolledtrialsinbreastreconstructionobstacletotrialinitiationoropportunitytoresolveaqualitativestudy
AT onbehalfoftheibrasteeringgroup perceivedbarrierstorandomisedcontrolledtrialsinbreastreconstructionobstacletotrialinitiationoropportunitytoresolveaqualitativestudy
_version_ 1724816349925998592