RESUMO
Trust exerts a multidimensional influence at the interpersonal level in the clinical trials setting. Trust and distrust are dynamic states that are impacted, either positively or negatively, with each participant-clinical trials team interaction. Currently, accepted models of trust posit that trust and distrust coexist and their effects on engagement and retention in clinical trials are mediated by ambivalence. While understanding of trust has been informed by a robust body of work, the role of distrust and ambivalence in the trust building process are less well understood. Furthermore, the role of ambivalence and its relationship to trust and distrust in the clinical trials and oncology settings are not known. Ambivalence is a normal and uncomfortable state in the complex decision making process that characterizes the recruitment and active treatment phases of the clinical trials experience. The current review was conducted to understand the constructs of ambivalence as a mediator of trust and distrust among vulnerable, minority participants through different stages of the oncology clinical trials continuum, its triggers and the contextual factors that might influence it in the setting of minority participation in oncology clinical trials. In addition, the researchers have sought to link theory to clinical intervention by investigating the feasibility and role of Motivational Interviewing in different stages of the clinical trials continuum. Findings suggest that ambivalence can be processed and managed to enable a participant to generate a response to their ambivalence. Thus, recognizing and managing triggers of ambivalence, which include, contradictory goals, role conflicts, membership dualities, and supporting participants through the process of reducing ambivalence is critical to successfully managing trust. Contextual factors related to the totality of one's previous health-care experience, specifically among the marginalized or vulnerable, can contribute to interpersonal ambivalence. In addition, changes in information gathering as a moderator of interpersonal ambivalence may have enormous implications for gathering, assessing, and accepting health information. Finally, motivational Interviewing has widespread applications in healthcare settings, which includes enabling participants to navigate ambivalence in shared-decision making with their clinician, as well as executing changes in participant behavior. Ultimately, the Integrated Model of Trust can incorporate the role of therapeutic techniques like Motivational Interviewing in different stages of the clinical trials continuum. Ambivalence is a key component of clinical trial participation; like trust, ambivalence can be managed and plays a major role in the management of trust in interpersonal relationships over time. The management of ambivalence may play a major role in increasing clinical trial participation particularly among the marginalized or the vulnerable, who may be more susceptible to feelings of ambivalence.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Trust is the cornerstone of clinical trial recruitment and retention. Efforts to decrease barriers and increase clinical trial participation among diverse populations have yielded modest results. There is an urgent need to better understand the complex interactions between trust and clinical trial participation. The process of trust-building has been a focus of intense research in the business community. Yet, little has been published about trust in oncology clinical trials or the process of building trust in clinical trials. Both clinical trials and business share common dimensions. Business strategies for building trust may be transferable to the clinical trial setting. This study was conducted to understand and utilize contemporary thinking about building trust to develop an Integrated Model of Trust that incorporates both clinical and business perspectives. METHODS: A key word-directed literature search of the PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and Google Search databases for entries dated between 1 January 1985 and 1 September 2015 was conducted to obtain information from which to develop an Integrated Model of Trust. RESULTS: Successful trial participation requires both participants and clinical trial team members to build distinctly different types of interpersonal trust to effect recruitment and retention. They are built under conditions of significant emotional stress and time constraints among people who do not know each other and have never worked together before. Swift Trust and Traditional Trust are sequentially built during the clinical trial process. Swift trust operates during the recruitment and very early active treatment phases of the clinical trial process. Traditional trust is built over time and operates during the active treatment and surveillance stages of clinical trials. The Psychological Contract frames the participants' and clinical trial team members' interpersonal trust relationship. The "terms" of interpersonal trust are negotiated through the psychological contract. Contract renegotiation occurs in response to cyclical changes within the trust relationship throughout trial participation. CONCLUSION: The Integrated Model of Trust offers a novel framework to interrogate the process by which diverse populations and clinical trial teams build trust. To our knowledge, this is the first model of trust-building in clinical trials that frames trust development through integrated clinical and business perspectives. By focusing on the process, rather than outcomes of trust-building diverse trial participants, clinical trials teams, participants, and cancer centers may be able to better understand, measure, and manage their trust relationships in real time. Ultimately, this may foster increased recruitment and retention of diverse populations to clinical trials.