Optimising adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols: A mixed-methods systematic review.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Clinical Trials Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-06 DOI:10.1177/17407745251358262
Angela Logan, Jonathan Marsden, Jennifer Freeman, Emma Cork, Bridie Kent
{"title":"Optimising adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols: A mixed-methods systematic review.","authors":"Angela Logan, Jonathan Marsden, Jennifer Freeman, Emma Cork, Bridie Kent","doi":"10.1177/17407745251358262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The results of rehabilitation clinical trials can be negatively affected by adherence to trial protocols. Adherence is multi-factorial, but studies often look at adherence factors separately. Therefore, a systematic review to appraise and synthesise the evidence is warranted to determine the barriers, facilitators and predictors associated with adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols, whether and how factors interact with one another, and how adherence to rehabilitation protocols can be optimised.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Databases searched were PubMed (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science and grey literature up to April 2024. A cohesive, integrated methodology was employed, leveraging the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0, to transform, synthesise and integrate data from various methodologies to address the review objectives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria (randomised controlled trials, qualitative studies related to randomised controlled trials or mixed-methods). Most of the studies were in stroke (n = 17), but other studies included neurological, respiratory, cardiovascular, post-surgical, osteoarthritis and elderly medical. Multiple factors affecting adherence protocols were identified. Adherence was measured in various ways, and setting pre-specified adherence levels was uncommon.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols is multi-dimensional and multi-factorial. Consensus of adherence measurement and interpretation of adherence levels is needed to make meaningful comparisons between trials. A standardised approach, including adopting a traffic light system, would enable trialists to implement changes mid-trial or stop the trial to avoid research waste. Adopting approaches from behavioural science in the design and conduct of inpatient rehabilitation trials may overcome some of the behavioural barriers identified and optimise adherence for those delivering and receiving the intervention.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration number CRD42021270121.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"728-744"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12819895/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745251358262","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The results of rehabilitation clinical trials can be negatively affected by adherence to trial protocols. Adherence is multi-factorial, but studies often look at adherence factors separately. Therefore, a systematic review to appraise and synthesise the evidence is warranted to determine the barriers, facilitators and predictors associated with adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols, whether and how factors interact with one another, and how adherence to rehabilitation protocols can be optimised.

Methods: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Databases searched were PubMed (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science and grey literature up to April 2024. A cohesive, integrated methodology was employed, leveraging the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0, to transform, synthesise and integrate data from various methodologies to address the review objectives.

Results: Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria (randomised controlled trials, qualitative studies related to randomised controlled trials or mixed-methods). Most of the studies were in stroke (n = 17), but other studies included neurological, respiratory, cardiovascular, post-surgical, osteoarthritis and elderly medical. Multiple factors affecting adherence protocols were identified. Adherence was measured in various ways, and setting pre-specified adherence levels was uncommon.

Conclusion: Adherence to inpatient rehabilitation trial protocols is multi-dimensional and multi-factorial. Consensus of adherence measurement and interpretation of adherence levels is needed to make meaningful comparisons between trials. A standardised approach, including adopting a traffic light system, would enable trialists to implement changes mid-trial or stop the trial to avoid research waste. Adopting approaches from behavioural science in the design and conduct of inpatient rehabilitation trials may overcome some of the behavioural barriers identified and optimise adherence for those delivering and receiving the intervention.

Review registration: Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration number CRD42021270121.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

优化住院康复试验方案的依从性:一项混合方法的系统综述。
背景:康复临床试验的结果可能会受到遵守试验方案的负面影响。坚持是多因素的,但研究经常单独考虑坚持的因素。因此,有必要进行系统回顾,评估和综合证据,以确定与依从住院康复试验方案相关的障碍、促进因素和预测因素,这些因素是否以及如何相互作用,以及如何优化依从康复方案。方法:采用混合方法进行系统评价,并按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)进行报告。检索数据库为PubMed (Ovid)、EMBASE (Ovid)、MEDLINE (Ovid)、CINAHL (Ovid)、PsycINFO (Ovid)、Cochrane Library、Health Technology Assessment Database、Web of Science和截至2024年4月的灰色文献。采用了一种有凝聚力的综合方法,利用实施研究综合框架(CFIR) 2.0来转换、综合和整合来自各种方法的数据,以实现审查目标。结果:27项研究符合纳入标准(随机对照试验、与随机对照试验相关的定性研究或混合方法)。大多数研究涉及中风(n = 17),但其他研究包括神经、呼吸、心血管、术后、骨关节炎和老年医学。确定了影响依从性方案的多种因素。依从性以各种方式测量,设定预先规定的依从性水平是不常见的。结论:住院康复试验方案的依从性是多方面、多因素的。需要对依从性测量和依从性水平的解释达成共识,以便在试验之间进行有意义的比较。一种标准化的方法,包括采用交通灯系统,将使试验人员能够在试验中实施改变或停止试验,以避免研究浪费。在住院康复试验的设计和实施中采用行为科学的方法可以克服一些已确定的行为障碍,并优化提供和接受干预的人员的依从性。综述注册:前瞻性系统综述注册,注册号CRD42021270121。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Trials
Clinical Trials 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Trials is dedicated to advancing knowledge on the design and conduct of clinical trials related research methodologies. Covering the design, conduct, analysis, synthesis and evaluation of key methodologies, the journal remains on the cusp of the latest topics, including ethics, regulation and policy impact.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书