Search

BACKGROUND Studying patients’ social needs is critical to the understanding of health conditions and disparities, and to inform strategies for improving health outcomes. Studies have shown that people of color, low-income families, and those with lower educational attainment experience greater hardships related to social needs. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an event that severely impacted people’s social needs. This pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020, and contributed to food and housing insecurity, while highlighting weaknesses in the health care system surrounding access to care. To combat these issues, legislators implemented unique policies and procedures to help alleviate worsening social needs throughout the pandemic, which had not previously been exerted to this degree. We believe that improvements related to COVID-19 legislature and policy have positively impacted people’s social needs in Kansas and Missouri, United States. In particular, Wyandotte County is of interest as it suffers greatly from issues related to social needs that many of these COVID-19–related policies aimed to improve. OBJECTIVE The research objective of this study was to evaluate the change in social needs before and after the COVID-19 pandemic declaration based on responses to a survey from The University of Kansas Health System (TUKHS). We further aimed to compare the social needs of respondents from Wyandotte County from those of respondents in other counties in the Kansas City metropolitan area. METHODS Social needs survey data from 2016 to 2022 were collected from a 12-question patient-administered survey distributed by TUKHS during a patient visit. This provided a longitudinal data set with 248,582 observations, which was narrowed down into a paired-response data set for 50,441 individuals who had provided at least one response before and after March 11, 2020. These data were then bucketed by county into Cass (Missouri), Clay (Missouri), Jackson (Missouri), Johnson (Kansas), Leavenworth (Kansas), Platte (Missouri), Wyandotte (Kansas), and Other counties, creating groupings with at least 1000 responses in each category. A pre-post composite score was calculated for each individual by adding their coded responses (yes=1, no=0) across the 12 questions. The Stuart-Maxwell marginal homogeneity test was used to compare the pre and post composite scores across all counties. Additionally, McNemar tests were performed to compare responses before and after March 11, 2020, for each of the 12 questions across all counties. Finally, McNemar tests were performed for questions 1, 7, 8, 9, and 10 for each of the bucketed counties. Significance was assessed at P RESULTS The Stuart-Maxwell test for marginal homogeneity was significant (PPPPPPPPPPP=.02), and were also less likely to request help with these unmet needs (OR=0.7368, P CONCLUSIONS Post-COVID-19 responses showed improvement across almost all social needs–related questions, indicating that the federal policy response possibly had a positive impact on social needs across the populations of Kansas and western Missouri. Some counties were impacted more than others and positive outcomes were not limited to urban counties. The availability of resources, safety net services, access to health care, and educational opportunities could play a role in this change. Future research should focus on improving survey response rates from rural counties to increase their sample size, and to evaluate other explanatory variables such as food pantry access, educational status, employment opportunities, and access to community resources. Government policies should be an area of focused research as they may affect the social needs and health of the individuals considered in this analysis.

Background Studying patients’ social needs is critical to the understanding of health conditions and disparities, and to inform strategies for improving health outcomes. Studies have shown that people of color, low-income families, and those with lower educational attainment experience greater hardships related to social needs. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an event that severely impacted people’s social needs. This pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020, and contributed to food and housing insecurity, while highlighting weaknesses in the health care system surrounding access to care. To combat these issues, legislators implemented unique policies and procedures to help alleviate worsening social needs throughout the pandemic, which had not previously been exerted to this degree. We believe that improvements related to COVID-19 legislature and policy have positively impacted people’s social needs in Kansas and Missouri, United States. In particular, Wyandotte County is of interest as it suffers greatly from issues related to social needs that many of these COVID-19–related policies aimed to improve. Objective The research objective of this study was to evaluate the change in social needs before and after the COVID-19 pandemic declaration based on responses to a survey from The University of Kansas Health System (TUKHS). We further aimed to compare the social needs of respondents from Wyandotte County from those of respondents in other counties in the Kansas City metropolitan area. Methods Social needs survey data from 2016 to 2022 were collected from a 12-question patient-administered survey distributed by TUKHS during a patient visit. This provided a longitudinal data set with 248,582 observations, which was narrowed down into a paired-response data set for 50,441 individuals who had provided at least one response before and after March 11, 2020. These data were then bucketed by county into Cass (Missouri), Clay (Missouri), Jackson (Missouri), Johnson (Kansas), Leavenworth (Kansas), Platte (Missouri), Wyandotte (Kansas), and Other counties, creating groupings with at least 1000 responses in each category. A pre-post composite score was calculated for each individual by adding their coded responses (yes=1, no=0) across the 12 questions. The Stuart-Maxwell marginal homogeneity test was used to compare the pre and post composite scores across all counties. Additionally, McNemar tests were performed to compare responses before and after March 11, 2020, for each of the 12 questions across all counties. Finally, McNemar tests were performed for questions 1, 7, 8, 9, and 10 for each of the bucketed counties. Significance was assessed at P Results The Stuart-Maxwell test for marginal homogeneity was significant (P Conclusions Post-COVID-19 responses showed improvement across almost all social needs–related questions, indicating that the federal policy response possibly had a positive impact on social needs across the populations of Kansas and western Missouri. Some counties were impacted more than others and positive outcomes were not limited to urban counties. The availability of resources, safety net services, access to health care, and educational opportunities could play a role in this change. Future research should focus on improving survey response rates from rural counties to increase their sample size, and to evaluate other explanatory variables such as food pantry access, educational status, employment opportunities, and access to community resources. Government policies should be an area of focused research as they may affect the social needs and health of the individuals considered in this analysis.

BACKGROUND The National Clinical Trials Network program conducts phase 2 or phase 3 treatment trials across all National Cancer Institute’s designated cancer centers. Participant accrual across these clinical trials is a critical factor in deciding their success. Cancer centers that cater to rural populations, such as The University of Kansas Cancer Center, have an additional responsibility to ensure rural residents have access and are well represented across these studies. OBJECTIVE There are scant data available regarding the factors that act as barriers to the accrual of rural residents in these clinical trials. This study aims to use electronic screening logs that were used to gather patient data at several participating sites in The Kansas University of Cancer Center’s Catchment area. METHODS Screening log data were used to assess what clinical trial participation barriers are faced by these patients. Additionally, the differences in clinical trial participation barriers were compared between rural and urban participating sites. RESULTS Analysis revealed that the hospital location rural urban category, defined as whether the hospital was in an urban or rural setting, had a medium effect on enrolment of patients in breast cancer and lung cancer trials (Cohen d=0.7). Additionally, the hospital location category had a medium effect on the proportion of recurrent lung cancer cases at the time of screening (d=0.6). CONCLUSIONS In consideration of the financially hostile nature of cancer treatment as well as geographical and transportation barriers, clinical trials extended to rural communities are uniquely positioned to alleviate the burden of nonmedical costs in trial participation. However, these options can be far less feasible for patients in rural settings. Since the number of patients with cancer who are eligible for a clinical trial is already limited by the stringent eligibility criteria required of such a complex disease, improving accessibility for rural patients should be a greater focus in health policy.

BACKGROUND As the cost of clinical trials continues to rise, novel approaches are required to ensure ethical allocation of resources. Multisite trials have been increasingly utilized in phase 1 trials for rare diseases and in phase 2 and 3 trials to meet accrual needs. The benefits of multisite trials include easier patient recruitment, expanded generalizability, and more robust statistical analyses. However, there are several problems more likely to arise in multisite trials, including accrual inequality, protocol nonadherence, data entry mistakes, and data integration difficulties. OBJECTIVE The Biostatistics & Data Science department at the University of Kansas Medical Center developed a clinical trial management system (comprehensive research information system [CRIS]) specifically designed to streamline multisite clinical trial management. METHODS A National Institute of Child Health and Human Development–funded phase 3 trial, the ADORE (assessment of docosahexaenoic acid [DHA] on reducing early preterm birth) trial fully utilized CRIS to provide automated accrual reports, centralize data capture, automate trial completion reports, and streamline data harmonization. RESULTS Using the ADORE trial as an example, we describe the utility of CRIS in database design, regulatory compliance, training standardization, study management, and automated reporting. Our goal is to continue to build a CRIS through use in subsequent multisite trials. Reports generated to suit the needs of future studies will be available as templates. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of similar tools and systems could provide significant cost-saving and operational benefit to multisite trials. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02626299; https://tinyurl.com/j6erphcj

Background The National Clinical Trials Network program conducts phase 2 or phase 3 treatment trials across all National Cancer Institute’s designated cancer centers. Participant accrual across these clinical trials is a critical factor in deciding their success. Cancer centers that cater to rural populations, such as The University of Kansas Cancer Center, have an additional responsibility to ensure rural residents have access and are well represented across these studies. Objective There are scant data available regarding the factors that act as barriers to the accrual of rural residents in these clinical trials. This study aims to use electronic screening logs that were used to gather patient data at several participating sites in The Kansas University of Cancer Center’s Catchment area. Methods Screening log data were used to assess what clinical trial participation barriers are faced by these patients. Additionally, the differences in clinical trial participation barriers were compared between rural and urban participating sites. Results Analysis revealed that the hospital location rural urban category, defined as whether the hospital was in an urban or rural setting, had a medium effect on enrolment of patients in breast cancer and lung cancer trials (Cohen d=0.7). Additionally, the hospital location category had a medium effect on the proportion of recurrent lung cancer cases at the time of screening (d=0.6). Conclusions In consideration of the financially hostile nature of cancer treatment as well as geographical and transportation barriers, clinical trials extended to rural communities are uniquely positioned to alleviate the burden of nonmedical costs in trial participation. However, these options can be far less feasible for patients in rural settings. Since the number of patients with cancer who are eligible for a clinical trial is already limited by the stringent eligibility criteria required of such a complex disease, improving accessibility for rural patients should be a greater focus in health policy.

Background As the cost of clinical trials continues to rise, novel approaches are required to ensure ethical allocation of resources. Multisite trials have been increasingly utilized in phase 1 trials for rare diseases and in phase 2 and 3 trials to meet accrual needs. The benefits of multisite trials include easier patient recruitment, expanded generalizability, and more robust statistical analyses. However, there are several problems more likely to arise in multisite trials, including accrual inequality, protocol nonadherence, data entry mistakes, and data integration difficulties. Objective The Biostatistics & Data Science department at the University of Kansas Medical Center developed a clinical trial management system (comprehensive research information system [CRIS]) specifically designed to streamline multisite clinical trial management. Methods A National Institute of Child Health and Human Development–funded phase 3 trial, the ADORE (assessment of docosahexaenoic acid [DHA] on reducing early preterm birth) trial fully utilized CRIS to provide automated accrual reports, centralize data capture, automate trial completion reports, and streamline data harmonization. Results Using the ADORE trial as an example, we describe the utility of CRIS in database design, regulatory compliance, training standardization, study management, and automated reporting. Our goal is to continue to build a CRIS through use in subsequent multisite trials. Reports generated to suit the needs of future studies will be available as templates. Conclusions The implementation of similar tools and systems could provide significant cost-saving and operational benefit to multisite trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02626299; https://tinyurl.com/j6erphcj