Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-nqxm9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-21T07:34:33.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

235 Root cause analysis of barriers and facilitators to accrual to a pragmatic, EHR-embedded clinical trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2025

Lindsay Lennox
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Bethany M Kwan
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Adit A Ginde
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Thomas W. Flaig
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Sarah V Kautz
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Matthew Mimnall
Affiliation:
UCHealth
Andrew Nicklwsky
Affiliation:
Uniersity of Colorado Cancer Center
Goldie Komaie
Affiliation:
University of Colrado Denver
Christine Velez
Affiliation:
University of Colrado Denver
Aaron Babour
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Laurie Blmberg-Romero
Affiliation:
UCHealth
Cecilia C. Low Wang
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Objectives/Goals: Electronic health record (EHR)-based recruitment can facilitate participation in clinical trials, but is not a panacea to trial accrual challenges. We conducted a root cause analysis to identify EHR-based accrual barriers and facilitators in a pragmatic randomized trial of metformin for those with prostate cancer and glucose intolerance. Methods/Study Population: We quantitatively analyzed enrollment drop-offs among eligible patients who either did not complete a consent (with analysis of EHR-embedded consent process) or who completed a consent but were not enrolled (with analysis of EHR implementation of a Best Practice Alert). We summarized data from the EHR by eligibility, provider encounters, and alerts, and generated CONSORT diagrams and tables to trace the enrollment pathway. We supplemented quantitative findings with a thematic analysis of semi-structured individual interviews with eligible patients (n = 10) and study providers (n = 4) to identify systematic barriers to recruitment and enrollment of eligible patients. Results/Anticipated Results: CONSORT diagram analysis found that 24% of potentially eligible patients (268 of 1130) had an eligible study encounter but were not enrolled. Additionally, BPAs were not triggering for some eligible patients. Interviews revealed that study providers wanted more detailed information about which study arm their patient would be assigned to, and about next steps after enrollment, especially relating to additional lab tests and follow-up care needed. Patient interviews suggested that patients often did not remember completing the consent process and felt overwhelmed with appointments and information; patients expected providers to actively bring up research opportunities during appointments. Discussion/Significance of Impact: While pragmatic EHR-embedded trials are often characterized as lower-burden, these trials still require active engagement by providers, as well as ongoing attention from both research and informatics teams to ensure that EHR-embedded processes are functioning as designed, and that they are effective in recruiting study participants.

Type
Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science