Issues for recruitment and retention of clinical research professionals at academic medical centers: Part 1 - collaborative conversations Un-Meeting findings.

Background: Identification of evidence-based factors related to status of the clinical research professional (CRP) workforce at academic medical centers (AMCs) will provide context for National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) policy considerations and guidance. The objective of this study is to explore barriers and opportunities related to the recruitment and retention of the CRP workforce. Materials and Methods: Qualitative data from a series of Un-Meeting breakout sessions and open-text survey questions were analyzed to explore barriers and recommendations for improving AMC CRP recruitment, retention and diversity. Results: While certain institutions have established competency-based frameworks for job descriptions, standardization remains generally lacking across CTSAs. AMCs report substantial increases in unfilled CRP positions leading to operational instability. Data confirmed an urgent need for closing gaps in CRP workforce at AMCs, especially for attracting, training, retaining, and diversifying qualified personnel. Improved collaboration with human resource departments, engagement with principal investigators, and overcoming both organizational and resource challenges were suggested strategies, as well as development of outreach to universities, community colleges, and high schools raising awareness of CRP career pathways. Discussion: Based on input from 130 CRP leaders at 35 CTSAs, four National Institute of General Medical Sciences' Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program sites, along with industry and government representatives, we identified several barriers to successful recruitment and retention of a highly trained and diverse CRP workforce. Results, including securing institutional support, champions, standardizing and adopting proven national models, improving local institutional policies to facilitate CRP hiring and job progression point to potential solutions.

Safety and Utility of Quantitative Sensory Testing among Adults with Sickle Cell Disease: Indicators of Neuropathic Pain?

OBJECTIVES: Pain is the hallmark symptom of sickle cell disease (SCD), yet the types of pain that these patients experience, and the underlying mechanisms, have not been well characterized. The study purpose was to determine the safety and utility of a mechanical and thermal quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol and the feasibility of utilizing neuropathic pain questionnaires among adults with SCD. METHODS: A convenience sample (N = 25, 18 women, mean age 38.5 ± 12.5 [20-58 years]) completed self-report pain and quality-of-life tools. Subjects also underwent testing with the TSA-II NeuroSensory Analyzer and calibrated von Frey microfilaments. RESULTS: We found that the QST protocol was safe and did not stimulate a SCD pain crisis. There was evidence of central sensitization (n = 15), peripheral sensitization (n = 1), a mix of central and peripheral sensitization (n = 8), or no sensitization (n = 1). The neuropathic pain self-report tools were feasible with evidence of construct validity; 40% of the subjects reported S-LANSS scores that were indicative of neuropathic pain and had evidence of central, peripheral or mixed sensitization. DISCUSSION: The QST protocol can be safely conducted in adults with SCD and provides evidence of central or peripheral sensitization, which is consistent with a neuropathic component to SCD pain. These findings are novel, warrant a larger confirmatory study, and indicate the need for normative QST data from African American adults and older adults.

Evaluation of the SCKnowIQ tool and reproductive CHOICES intervention among young adults with sickle cell disease or sickle cell trait.

The study purpose was to evaluate a computer-based questionnaire (SCKnowIQ) and CHOICES educational intervention using cognitive interviewing with childbearing-aged people with sickle cell disease (SCD) or trait (SCT). Ten control group participants completed the SCKnowIQ twice. Ten intervention group participants completed the SCKnowIQ before and after the CHOICES intervention. Most participants found the questionnaire items appropriate and responded to items as the investigators intended. Participants' responses indicated that the information on SCD and SCT and reproductive options was understandable, balanced, important, and new to some. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were adequate (.47 to .87) for 4 of the 6 scales, with significant within-group changes in knowledge scores for the intervention group but not for the control group. Findings show evidence for potential efficacy of the intervention, but proof of efficacy requires a larger randomized study.