key: cord-1012945-ifqpzfwt
authors: Tran, Nhu N.; Tran, Michelle; Lopez, Jeraldine; Woon, Jessica; Nguyen, Jennifer; Brecht, Mary-Lynn
title: Impact of COVID-19 on pediatric clinical research
date: 2021-06-15
journal: J Pediatr Nurs
DOI: 10.1016/j.pedn.2021.06.005
sha: 7353e308fa33edfd13065f28fd2554b1a788cd51
doc_id: 1012945
cord_uid: ifqpzfwt

PURPOSE: Many public institutions and settings have taken action to limit exposure to and slow the spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). We sought to characterize the impact of stay-at-home orders on our study of cerebral autoregulation and its association with developmental delays in infants with congenital heart disease compared with healthy controls. DESIGN AND METHODS: We calculated the number of participants recruited (i.e., not enrolled in the study) and assessed (i.e., currently enrolled) before March 2020 (pre-COVID-19) and the number of participants that we could not recruit or assess between March and July 2020 (missed due to COVID-19), separately for congenital heart disease and healthy control infants, in reference to the impacts of COVID-19. We used negative binomial regressions to determine incidence rate ratios which compared participants recruited and assessed pre-COVID-19 and missed due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Recruitment and assessments significantly decreased following the pandemic, i.e., participants were more likely to be recruited or be assessed pre-COVID-19 compared to during the pandemic. Study participants were 3.3 times as likely to have assessments performed pre-COVID-19 compared to during the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.001). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Clinical research teams may consider making protocol modifications such as virtual visits or video recordings explaining the study, for example, to adjust to the restrictions caused by COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic drastically reduced recruitment and assessments completed in our study. Study teams will need to continue to modify procedures for recruitment and assessments that align with COVID-19 regulations to facilitate research progress during the pandemic.

declared COVID-19 as a national emergency. Due to the rapid spread of businesses and organizations throughout the world had to close unexpectedly. The reinforcement of physical and social distancing and the implementation of stay-at-home orders put research operations on hold. Research studies were highly affected due to the inability to collect data.

The COVID-19 pandemic has curtailed most clinical research, pausing trials for new enrollment to minimize participants' risk of exposure to COVID-19. From March 1 st to April 26 th , 2020, 905 clinical trials reported the COVID-19 pandemic as the reason for suspension (Asaad et al., 2020) . The suspension of these trials posed significant clinical implications on patients as it slowed potential treatments for non-COVID-19 diseases, e.g., participants with endstage diseases where drugs offered by clinical trials may be their only potential hope for treatment (Asaad et al., 2020) . The pandemic was especially devastating for oncology patients in clinical trials because they could not receive the investigational treatments outside of the clinical research unit, nor could clinical researchers provide investigational treatments to their participants outside of their facilities due to research regulations (de Miguel et al., 2020) .

Health care facilities quickly implemented new procedures and restrictions that prevented clinical researchers from obtaining their data. Research, including those that required in-person visits, was deemed nonessential and came to a halt (Omary et al., 2020) . Researchers could no longer perform experiments, assessments, and recruitment of participants (Weiner et al., 2020) , resulting in a pause of data collection, which caused gaps in many research studies. Many medical institutions nationwide encouraged the stay-at-home order, causing most nonessential staff to work remotely at the beginning of March 2020. Although remote research can be performed, many studies cannot function for extended periods without direct contact with J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof participants (Colbert et al., 2020) . The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our research study at Children's Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA).

We collected data on the number of participants that we recruited (i.e., eligible infants not enrolled in the study) and assessed (i.e., infants currently enrolled in the study) pre-COVID-19, missed due to . This equaled 6 time points: (1) participant recruitment before March 2020 (pre-COVID-19); (2) participant assessments pre-COVID-19;

(3) participant recruitment missed between March 2020 and July 2020 (missed due to COVID-19); (4) participant assessments missed due to COVID-19; (5) participant recruitment after July 2020 (post-COVID-19) when the county lifted stay-at-home orders; and (6) participant assessments post-COVID-19. Though we collected data on participants post-COVID-19, we did not run any statistical analyses using post-COVID-19 data because we could not successfully recruit or assess participants post-COVID-19 (as of August 2020). We then categorized participants into 2 groups: infants diagnosed with congenital heart disease (CHD) and healthy control (HC) infants.

Stratified descriptive analyses (based on group and assessment time points) were conducted and summarized as means with standard deviations for continuous variables and frequencies with proportions for categorical variables. Pearson's chi-square tests evaluated the difference in categorical variables versus CHD status at each assessment time point. We conducted Fisher's Exact test if any value within the category was less than five. Two-sample J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof independent T-tests determined the difference between the means of 2 independent groups of infants at each time point of assessment for continuous variables.

We used negative binomial regressions to estimate incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals. We conducted separate regression analyses to test the association between pre-COVID-19 and missed due to COVID-19 recruitment and assessment for each group. Pvalues ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant. We conducted all statistical analyses on IBM SPSS Statistics 27.

We recruited a total of 104 (33%) of the 315 infants that were eligible to participate in our study before March 2020 (pre-COVID-19), which included 57 HC and 47 infants diagnosed with CHD. We could not recruit a total of 127 eligible participants, 105 HC and 22 CHD infants, due to COVID-19. We did not recruit any infants between July to August 2020 (post-COVID-

We performed a total of 160 assessments pre-COVID-19 (68 on HC and 92 on CHD infants). We had 49 infants (35 HC and 14 CHD infants) miss their study assessments due to COVID-19. From July to August 2020, post-COVID-19, we performed 6 HC assessments and 0 CHD assessments. Detailed findings can be found in Table 1 .

Pre-COVID-19, we performed assessments on 48 infants (19 HC, 29 CHD infants) at the neonatal age time point, 44 infants (21 HC, 23 CHD infants) at 3-months of age, 40 infants (16 6-, 9-months respectively), especially in the CHD group. The mean gestational age at the time of the neonatal exam was 40.7 weeks (SD±0.5). Additionally, we found a statistically significant difference in mean gestational age between the HC and CHD infants at the neonatal time point (t=5.8, 95%CI: 0.4, 0.9, p<0.001). Detailed demographic findings can be found in Table 2 .

A negative binomial regression analysis of recruitment and assessments at the different COVID-19 time points among the study participants is shown in Table 3 and Figure 1 . CHD infants were 2.1 times as likely to be recruited into our study pre-COVID-19 compared to during COVID-19 (missed due to COVID-19) (β=0.8 exponentiated, 95%CI: 1.9, 3.5, p=0.003).

HC infants were 1.8 times as likely to be recruited into the study pre-COVID-19 compared to during COVID-19 (missed due to COVID-19) (β=0.6 exponentiated, 95%CI: 1.3, 2.5, p<0.001).

Study participants were 3.3 times as likely to have assessments performed pre-COVID-19 (β=1.2 exponentiated, 95%CI: 2.4, 4.5, p<0.001) compared to during the COVID-19 pandemic (missed due to COVID-19). CHD infants were 6.6 times as likely to have an assessment performed pre-COVID-19 compared to during COVID-19 (missed due to COVID-19) (β=1.9 exponentiated, 95%CI: 3.7, 11.5, p<0.001). HC infants were 1.9 times as likely to have an assessment performed pre-COVID-19 (β=0.7 exponentiated, 95%CI: 1.3, 2.9, p=0.001) than during COVID-19 (missed due to COVID-19).

We found significantly decreased participant enrollment and follow-up study assessments due to COVID-19. Participants enrolled pre-COVID-19 were less willing to return for their follow-up appointments in fear of unnecessary COVID-19 exposure in the hospital setting. Many of our study participants received care at our institution's specialty clinics and preferred to schedule study assessments on the same day as their clinic visits. Since our institution now J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof provides telehealth visits, many families chose that platform rather than in-person visits. In addition, we could not reschedule many of our missed study assessments as the participants exceeded the age range for that particular assessment time point.

Our results were similar to other studies that described the impact of COVID-19 on (Padala et al., 2020) . Although the participants in this study were also considered a high-risk group, they had the opportunity to consult with their caregivers and family before deciding to come in for their appointments (Padala et al., 2020) . In contrast, when we began to contact families to in July 2020, mothers immediately refused to return for our study assessments, due to their concern of exposing their infant to COVID-19, without consultation with the infant's father or other family members. It is unknown if the mother's decisions would have changed after speaking with other family members, but it seemed to help other researchers. Thus, the target population may play a role in the enrollment and participation rates during and after the pandemic.

Research studies must modify their protocols and procedures to accommodate COVID-19 precautions and a changing research environment. In order to accommodate physical distancing recommendations, essential research staff are required to work restricted hours with either split schedules or staggered shifts (Omary et al., 2020) . We have adjusted the total number of persons allowed in our shared lab at one time and are limited to one study assessment per day.

Recruitment activities have been altered to virtual meetings or telephone calls. Other researchers have created recruitment videos or instructional videos for data/specimen collection (Brezing et al.; Izmailova et al.) . In order to continue to have successful recruitment and retention, researchers must be flexible and adjust their protocols to accommodate the new COVID-19 era.

Our institution introduced re-entry and recovery plans for researchers in early July 2020.

In our study specifically, the suspension of study assessments interrupted our ability to perform neurodevelopmental exams and refer participants to the Regional Centers for possible early intervention services, if applicable. Therefore, those infants affected by CHD may not have J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof received the necessary screening and referrals for interventions to improve their development and future quality of life. Pre-COVID-19, families preferred to schedule a research appointment on the same day that they had a clinical visit. However, since most clinics offered telehealth visits, parents were less likely to come in-person for a research appointment or non-essential hospital visit. To help ease their concerns, we emphasized the safety of the research visits with:

(1) wearing personal protective equipment; (2) routine hand hygiene; (3) assessment performed in a private room in a building across the street from the hospital; (4) and following hospital regulations, including COVID-19 screenings and using standard precautions. These actions have facilitated our follow-up study assessments.

Our study had a few limitations. We could not determine how our recruitment and assessments were affected post-COVID-19 compared to during COVID-19 (missed due to COVID-19) and pre-COVID-19 as we were unsuccessful in recruiting and assessing eligible infants from July to August 2020 when stay-at-home restrictions were loosened. Another limitation is the assumption that our sample size was large enough to use negative binomial regression. We believe we had a sufficient sample size, since we detected significant differences between timeframes. In addition, the precision of our results might be compromised as the use of negative binomial regressions indicated that we had overdispersion in our data; variances were much larger than the means. Nevertheless, our results shed light on how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted pediatric clinical research.

The COVID-19 pandemic greatly impacted our study with a drastic decrease in participant recruitment and assessment. Alternative or contingency plans, e.g., virtual or J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f .001** Assessment in CHD infants 6.6 3.7 -11.5 <0.001** Assessment in HC infants 1.9 1.3 -2.9 0.001** Note. This table indicates the likelihood of recruiting eligible infants into our study and the likelihood of currently enrolled infants having study assessments performed before March 2020 (pre-COVID) compared to between March 2020 and July 2020 (missed due to . For instance, infants in both groups were 3.3 times more likely to be assessed pre-COVID-19 compared to missed due to COVID-19. a CHD = Congenital Heart Disease. b HC = Healthy Controls. 

Note. This figure depicts the number of infants we recruited and assessed before March 2020 (pre-COVID-19) compared to the number of infants we failed to recruit and assess during March 2020 and July 2020 due to COVID-19 restrictions (missed due to COVID-19). a CHD = Congenital Heart Disease. b HC = Healthy Controls.

The Impact of COVID-19 on

Digital Clinical Trials for Substance Use Disorders in the Age of Covid-19

Cancer Research after COVID-19: Where Do We Go from Here? Cancer cell

Increased vulnerability of clinical research units during the COVID-19 crisis and their protection

Epidemiology of Coronavirus Disease in Gansu Province, China, 2020. Emerging Infectious Disease journal

The COVID-19 pandemic: a catalyst to improve clinical trials