Complex realities: community engagement for a paediatric randomized controlled malaria vaccine trial in Kilifi, Kenya

Vibian Angwenyi, Dorcas Kamuya, Dorothy Mwachiro, Betty Kalama, Vicki Marsh, Patricia Njuguna, Sassy Molyneux, Vibian Angwenyi, Dorcas Kamuya, Dorothy Mwachiro, Betty Kalama, Vicki Marsh, Patricia Njuguna, Sassy Molyneux

Abstract

Background: Community engagement (CE) is increasingly promoted for biomedical research conducted in resource poor settings for both intrinsic and instrumental purposes. Given the potential importance of CE, but also complexities and possibility of unexpected negative outcomes, there is need for more documentation of CE processes in practice. We share experiences of formal CE for a paediatric randomized controlled malaria vaccine trial conducted in three sites within Kilifi County, Kenya.

Methods: Social scientists independent of the trial held in-depth individual interviews with trial researchers (n=5), community leaders (n=8) and parents (15 with enrolled children and 4 without); and group discussions with fieldworkers (n=6) and facility staff (n=2). We conducted a survey of participating households (n=200) and observed over 150 CE activities.

Results: The overall CE plan was similar across the three study sites, although less community-based information in site C. Majority perceived CE activities to clear pre-existing concerns and misconceptions; increase visibility, awareness of and trust in trial staff. Challenges included: some community leaders attempting to exert pressure on people to enrol; local wording in information sheets and consent forms feeding into serious anxieties about the trial; and concerns about reduced CE over time. Negative effects of these challenges were mitigated through changes to on-going CE activities, and final information sharing and consent being conducted individually by trained clinical staff. One year after enrolment, 31% (n = 62) of participants' parents reported malaria prevention as the main aim of the activities their children were involved in, and 93% wanted their children to remain involved.

Conclusion: The trial teams' goals for CE were relatively clear from the outset. Other actors' hopes and expectations (like higher allowances and future employment) were not openly discussed, but emerged over the course of engagements. Encouraging open discussion of all actors' intentions and goals from the outset takes time, risks raising expectations that cannot be met, and is complex. However, doing so in future similar trials may allow successes here to be built upon, and some challenges minimized or avoided.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00866619 (registration 19-Mar-2009).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Map of trial sites.

References

    1. Tindana PO, Rozmovits L, Boulanger RF, Bandewar SVS, Aborigo RA, Hodgson AVO, Kolopack P, Lavery JV. Aligning community engagement with traditional authority structures in global health research: a case study from Northern Ghana. Am J Public Health. 2011;101:1857–1867. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300203.
    1. Dickert N, Sugarman J. Ethical goals of community consultation in research. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1123–1127. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.058933.
    1. Emanuel E, Wendler D, Killen J, Grady C. What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. J Infect Dis. 2004;189:930–937. doi: 10.1086/381709.
    1. Wellcome Trust. Community Engagement - Under the Microscope. Thailand: Wellcome Trust; 2011. International engagement workshop report.
    1. Participants in the Community Engagement, Consent Workshop. Kilifi Kenya March 2011. Consent and community engagement in diverse research contexts: reviewing and developing research and practice. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2013;8:1–18.
    1. Marsh VM, Kamuya DK, Parker MJ, Molyneux CS. Working with concepts: the role of community in international collaborative biomedical research. Public Health Ethics. 2011;4:26–39. doi: 10.1093/phe/phr007.
    1. Cheah PY, Khin ML, Phaiphun L, Maelankiri L, Parker M, Day NP, White NJ, Nosten F. Community engagement on the Thai-Burmese border: rationale, experience and lessons learnt. Int Health. 2010;2:123–129. doi: 10.1016/j.inhe.2010.02.001.
    1. Lang TA, Gould J, von Seidlein L, Lusingu JP, Mshamu S, Ismael S, Liheluka E, Kamuya D, Mwachiro D, Olotu A, Njuguna P, Bejon P, Marsh V, Molyneux C. Approaching the community about screening children for a multicentre malaria vaccine trial. Int Health. 2012;4:47–54. doi: 10.1016/j.inhe.2011.10.003.
    1. Kamuya DM, Marsh V, Kombe FK, Geissler PW, Molyneux SC. Engaging communities to strengthen research ethics in low-income settings: selection and perceptions of members of a network of representatives in coastal Kenya. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;13:10–20. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12014.
    1. Angwenyi V, Kamuya D, Mwachiro D, Marsh V, Njuguna P, Molyneux S. Working with community health workers as ‘volunteers’ in a vaccine trial: practical and ethical experiences and implications. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;13:38–47. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12015.
    1. Kamuya DM, Theobald SJ, Munywoki PK, Koech D, Geissler WP, Molyneux SC. Evolving friendships and shifting ethical dilemmas: fieldworkers’ experiences in a short term community based study in Kenya. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;13:1–9. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12009.
    1. Marsh VM, Kamuya DM, Mlamba AM, Williams TN, Molyneux SS. Experiences with community engagement and informed consent in a genetic cohort study of severe childhood diseases in Kenya. BMC Med Ethics. 2010;11:13. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-11-13.
    1. Gikonyo C, Bejon P, Marsh V, Molyneux S. Taking social relationships seriously: lessons learned from the informed consent practices of a vaccine trial on the Kenyan coast. Soc Sci Med. 2008;67:708–720. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.02.003.
    1. Molyneux CS, Peshu N. K M: trust and informed consent: insights from community members on the Kenyan coast. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:1463–1473. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.073.
    1. Gikonyo C, Kamuya D, Mbete B, Njuguna P, Olotu A, Bejon P, Marsh V, Molyneux S. Feedback of research findings for vaccine trials: experiences from two malaria vaccine trials involving healthy children on the Kenyan coast. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;13:48–56. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12010.
    1. Nyika A, Chilengi R, Ishengoma D, Mtenga S, Thera MA, Sissoko MS, Lusingu J, Tiono AB, Doumbo O, Sirima SB, Lemnge M, Kilama WL. Engaging diverse communities participating in clinical trials: case examples from across Africa. Malar J. 2010;9:86. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-9-86.
    1. Tindana P, Bull S, Amenga-Etego L, de Vries J, Aborigo R, Koram K, Kwiatkowski D, Parker M. Seeking consent to genetic and genomic research in a rural Ghanaian setting: a qualitative study of the MalariaGEN experience. BMC Med Ethics. 2012;13:15. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-15.
    1. Tindana P, Singh J, Tracy C, Upshur R, Daar A, Singer P. Grand challenges in global health: community engagement in research in developing countries. PLoS Med. 2007;4:1451–1455.
    1. Nyika A. Ethical and practical challenges surrounding genetic and genomic research in developing countries. Acta Trop. 2009;112(Suppl 1):S21–S31.
    1. Reynolds L, Cousins T, Newell ML, Imrie J. The social dynamics of consent and refusal in HIV surveillance in rural South Africa. Soc Sci Med. 2013;77:118–125.
    1. The RTSS Clinical Trials Partnership. First results of phase 3 trial of RTS, S/AS01 malaria vaccine in African children. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1863–1875.
    1. Scott JAG, Bauni E, Moisi JC, Ojal J, Gatakaa H, Nyundo C, Molyneux CS, Kombe F, Tsofa B, Marsh K, Peshu N, Williams TN. Profile: the Kilifi health and demographic surveillance system (KHDSS) Int J Epidemiol. 2012;41:650–657. doi: 10.1093/ije/dys062.
    1. Community Liason Group and Ethics Researchers. KEMRI bioethics review. Nairobi: ADILI-KEMRI Bioethics Center; 2013. Research ethics support and studies at the KEMRI-Wellcome trust programme; pp. 13–16. (Volume 3).
    1. Ritchie J, Spencer L. In: Analysing Qualitative Data. Bryman A, Burgess R, editor. London: Routledge; 1993. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research; pp. 173–194.
    1. Geissler PW, Pool R. Editorial: popular concerns about medical research projects in sub-Saharan Africa - a critical voice in debates about medical research ethics. Trop Med Int Health. 2006;11:975–982. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2006.01682.x.
    1. Kingori P, Muchimba M, Sikateyo B, Amadi B, Kelly P. ‘Rumours’ and clinical trials: a retrospective examination of a paediatric malnutrition study in Zambia, southern Africa. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:556. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-556.
    1. Febir LG, Asante KP, Dzorgbo DB, Senah KA, Letsa TS, Owusu-Agyei S. Community perceptions of a malaria vaccine in the Kintampo districts of Ghana. Malar J. 2013;12:156. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-12-156.
    1. Boga M, Davies A, Kamuya D, Kinyanjui SM, Kivaya E, Kombe F, Lang T, Marsh V, Mbete B, Mlamba A, Molyneux S, Mulupi S, Mwalukore S. Strengthening the informed consent process in international health research through community engagement: the KEMRI-Wellcome trust research programme experience. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1001089. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001089.
    1. Riessman CK. Exporting ethics: a narrative about narrative research in South India. Health. 2005;9:473–490.
    1. Weijer C, Goldsand G, Emanuel EJ. Protecting communities in research: current guidelines and limits of extrapolation. Nat Genet. 1999;23:275–280. doi: 10.1038/15455.
    1. Lindegger G, Milford C, Slack C, Quayle M, Xaba X, Vardas E. Beyond the checklist: assessing understanding for HIV vaccine trial participation in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:560–566.
    1. Leach M, Fairhead J. Vaccine Anxieties: Global Science, Child Health and Society. London: Earthscan; 2007. Anxieties over science: engaging vaccine trials in the Gambia; pp. 156–157.
    1. Long N. In: Development Intervention: Actor and Activity Perspectives. Kontinen T, editor. Helsinki: Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research and Institute for Development Studies; 2001. Actors, interfaces and development intervention: meanings, purposes and powers; pp. 14–36.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera