↓ Skip to main content

Participation in a trial in the emergency situation: a qualitative study of patient experience in the UK WOLLF trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Participation in a trial in the emergency situation: a qualitative study of patient experience in the UK WOLLF trial
Published in
Trials, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2722-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Tutton, Juul Achten, Sarah E. Lamb, Keith Willett, Matthew L. Costa, on behalf of the UK WOLLF Research Collaborators

Abstract

Patients can struggle to make sense of trials in emergency situations. This study examines patient experience of participating in the United Kingdom, Wound management of Open Lower Limb Fractures (UK WOLLF) study, a trial of standard wound management versus Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT). The aim of the study was to understand the patient's lived experience of taking part in a trial of wound dressings. Interviews drawing on Phenomenology were undertaken with a purposive sample of 20 patients, on average 12 days into their hospital stay from July 2012-July 2013. The participants were vulnerable due to the emotional and physical impact of injury. They expressed their trial experience through the theme of being compromised identified in categories of being dependent, being trusting, being grateful and being without experience. Participants felt dependent on and trusted the team to make the right decisions for them and not cause them harm. Their hopes for future recovery were also invested within the expertise of the team. Despite often not being well enough to consent to the study prior to surgery, they wished to be involved as much as possible. In agreeing to take part they expressed gratitude for their care, wanted to be helpful to others and considered the trial interventions to be a small component in relation to the enormity of their injury and broader treatment. In making sense of the trial they felt they could not understand the interventions without experience of them but if they received NPWT they developed a strong technological preference for this intervention. Patients prefer to be involved in studies within the limits of their capacity, despite not being able to provide informed consent. A variety of sources of knowledge may enable participants to feel that they have a better understanding of the interventions. Professional staff need to be aware of the situated nature of decision making where participants invest their hopes for recovery in the team. Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN33756652 . Registered on 24 February 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Master 8 10%
Researcher 8 10%
Other 6 8%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 31 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 16%
Psychology 6 8%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 31 39%