OBJECTIVE: The aim was to describe barriers to patient and family advisory council (PFAC) member engagement in research and strategies to support engagement in this context. METHODS: We formed a study team comprising patient advisors, researchers, physicians, and nurses. We then undertook a qualitative study using focus groups and interviews. We invited PFAC members, PFAC leaders, hospital leaders, and researchers from nine academic medical centers that are part of a hospital medicine research network to participate. All participants were asked a standard set of questions exploring the study question. We used content analysis to analyze data. RESULTS: Eighty PFAC members and other stakeholders (45 patient/caregiver members of PFACs, 12 PFAC leaders, 12 hospital leaders, 11 researchers) participated in eight focus and 19 individual interviews. We identified ten barriers to PFAC member engagement in research. Codes were organized into three categories: (1) individual PFAC member reluctance; (2) lack of skills and training; and (3) problems connecting with the right person at the right time. We identified ten strategies to support engagement. These were organized into four categories: (1) creating an environment where the PFAC members are making a genuine and unique contribution; (2) building community between PFAC members and researchers; (3) best practice activities for researchers to facilitate engagement; and (4) tools and training. CONCLUSION: Barriers to engaging PFAC members in research include patients negative perceptions of research and researchers lack of training. Building community between PFAC members and researchers is a foundation for partnerships. There are shared training opportunities for PFAC members and researchers to build skills about research and research engagement.

Objectives

The Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) study is testing the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention to prevent serious fall injuries. Our aim was to describe procedures that were implemented to optimize participant retention; report retention yields by age, sex, clinical site, and follow-up time; provide reasons for study withdrawals; and highlight the successes and lessons learned from the STRIDE retention efforts.

Design

Pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

Setting

A total of 86 primary care practices within 10 US healthcare systems.

Participants

A total of 5451 community-living persons, 70 years of age or older, at high risk for serious fall injuries.

Measurements

Study outcomes were collected every 4 months by a central call center. Reconsent was required to extend follow-up beyond the originally planned 36 months.

Results

Over a median follow-up of 3.2 years (interquartile range = 2.8-3.7 y), 439 (8.1%) participants died and 600 (11.0%) withdrew their consent or did not reconsent to extend follow-up beyond 36 months, yielding rates (per 100 person-years) of deaths and withdrawals of 2.6 and 3.6, respectively. The withdrawal rate increased with advancing age, was comparable for men and women, and did not differ much by clinical site. The most common reasons for withdrawal were illness and unable to contact for reconsent at 36 months. Completion of the follow-up interviews was greater than 93% at each time point. Most participants completed all (71.8%) or all but one (9.2%) of the follow-up interviews. The most common reason for not completing a follow-up interview was unable to contact, with rates ranging from 2.8% at 40 months to 4.6% at 20 months.

Conclusion

Completion of the thrice-yearly follow-up interviews in STRIDE was high, and retention of participants over 44 months exceeded the original projections. The procedures used in STRIDE, together with lessons learned, should assist other investigators who are planning or conducting large pragmatic trials of vulnerable older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1242-1249, 2020.

Background

We describe the recruitment of participants for Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE), a large pragmatic cluster randomized trial that is testing the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention to prevent serious fall injuries. Eligible persons were 70 years or older, community-living, and at increased risk for serious fall injuries. The modified goal was to recruit 5,322 participants over 20 months from 86 primary care practices within 10 diverse health care systems across the United States.

Methods

The at-risk population was identified using two distinct but complementary screening strategies that included three questions administered centrally via the mail (nine sites) or in the clinic (one site), while recruitment was completed centrally by staff at Yale.

Results

For central screening, 226,603 letters mailed to 135,118 patients yielded 28,719 positive screens (12.7% of those mailed and 46.5% of the 61,729 returned). In the clinic, 22,537 screens were completed, leading to 5,732 positive screens (25.4%). Of the 34,451 patients who screened positive for high risk of serious fall injuries, 31,872 were sent a recruitment packet and, of these, 5,451 (17.1%) were enrolled over 20 months (mean age: 80 years; 62% female). The participation rate was 34.0% among eligible patients. The enrollment yields were 3.6% (vs 5% projected) for each patient screened centrally, despite multiple screens, and 10.5% (vs 33.9% projected) for each positive clinic screen.

Conclusions

Despite lower-than-expected yields, the STRIDE Study exceeded its modified recruitment goal. If the STRIDE intervention is found to be effective, the two distinct strategies for identifying a high-risk population of older persons could be implemented by most health care systems.

Background

Fall injuries are a major cause of morbidity and mortality among older adults. We describe the design of a pragmatic trial to compare the effectiveness of an evidence-based, patient-centered multifactorial fall injury prevention strategy to an enhanced usual care.

Methods

Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) is a 40-month cluster-randomized, parallel-group, superiority, pragmatic trial being conducted at 86 primary care practices in 10 health care systems across United States. The 86 practices were randomized to intervention or control group using covariate-based constrained randomization, stratified by health care system. Participants are community-living persons, ≥70 years, at increased risk for serious fall injuries. The intervention is a comanagement model in which a nurse Falls Care Manager performs multifactorial risk assessments, develops individualized care plans, which include surveillance, follow-up evaluation, and intervention strategies. Control group receives enhanced usual care, with clinicians and patients receiving evidence-based information on falls prevention. Primary outcome is serious fall injuries, operationalized as those leading to medical attention (nonvertebral fractures, joint dislocation, head injury, lacerations, and other major sequelae). Secondary outcomes include all fall injuries, all falls, and well-being (concern for falling; anxiety and depressive symptoms; physical function and disability). Target sample size was 5,322 participants to provide 90% power to detect 20% reduction in primary outcome rate relative to control.

Results

Trial enrolled 5,451 subjects in 20 months. Intervention and follow-up are ongoing.

Conclusions

The findings of the STRIDE study will have important clinical and policy implications for the prevention of fall injuries in older adults.

Background/objectives

In the Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) study, a multifactorial intervention was associated with a nonsignificant 8% reduction in time to first serious fall injury but a significant 10% reduction in time to first self-reported fall injury relative to enhanced usual care. The effect of the intervention on other outcomes important to patients has not yet been reported. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the intervention on patient well-being including concern about falling, anxiety, depression, physical function, and disability.

Design

Pragmatic cluster-randomized trial of 5,451 community-living persons at high risk for serious fall injuries.

Setting

A total of 86 primary care practices within 10 U.S. healthcare systems.

Participants

A random subsample of 743 persons aged 75 and older.

Measurements

The well-being measures, assessed at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months, included a modified version of the Fall Efficacy Scale, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) anxiety and depression scales, and Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument.

Results

Participants in the intervention (n = 384) and control groups (n = 359) were comparable in age: mean (standard deviation) of 81.9 (4.7) versus 81.8 (5.0) years. Mean scores were similar between groups at 12 and 24 months for concern about falling, physical function, and disability, whereas the intervention group's mean scores on anxiety and depression were .7 points lower (i.e., better) at 12 months and .6 to .8 points lower at 24 months. For each of these outcomes, differences between the groups' adjusted least square mean changes from baseline to 12 and 24 months, respectively, were quantitatively small. The overall difference in means between groups over 2 years was statistically significant only for depression, favoring the intervention: -1.19 (99% confidence interval, -2.36 to -.02), with 3.5 points representing a minimally important difference.

Conclusions

STRIDE's multifactorial intervention to reduce fall injuries was not associated with clinically meaningful improvements in patient well-being.

Background

Injuries from falls are major contributors to complications and death in older adults. Despite evidence from efficacy trials that many falls can be prevented, rates of falls resulting in injury have not declined.

Methods

We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention that included risk assessment and individualized plans, administered by specially trained nurses, to prevent fall injuries. A total of 86 primary care practices across 10 health care systems were randomly assigned to the intervention or to enhanced usual care (the control) (43 practices each). The participants were community-dwelling adults, 70 years of age or older, who were at increased risk for fall injuries. The primary outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first serious fall injury, adjudicated with the use of participant report, electronic health records, and claims data. We hypothesized that the event rate would be lower by 20% in the intervention group than in the control group.

Results

The demographic and baseline characteristics of the participants were similar in the intervention group (2802 participants) and the control group (2649 participants); the mean age was 80 years, and 62.0% of the participants were women. The rate of a first adjudicated serious fall injury did not differ significantly between the groups, as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis (events per 100 person-years of follow-up, 4.9 in the intervention group and 5.3 in the control group; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.06; P = 0.25). The rate of a first participant-reported fall injury was 25.6 events per 100 person-years of follow-up in the intervention group and 28.6 events per 100 person-years of follow-up in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.99; P = 0.004). The rates of hospitalization or death were similar in the two groups.

Conclusions

A multifactorial intervention, administered by nurses, did not result in a significantly lower rate of a first adjudicated serious fall injury than enhanced usual care. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; STRIDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02475850.).