Implementing pragmatic clinical trials in rural settings: Challenges, solutions and lessons learned.
Background: Rural communities face disproportionate rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose mortality but continue to be underrepresented in clinical research and underserved in access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Structural barriers including shortages of qualified providers, transportation challenges, and stigma limit uptake of evidence-based treatment. To address these gaps, the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) launched two pragmatic trials focused exclusively on rural populations: CTN-0102, a telemedicine (TM) feasibility study connecting rural primary care patients to external MOUD providers, and CTN-0102XR (RXR), a pilot randomized trial evaluating extended-release buprenorphine (Brixadi®) compared to sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone.
Objective: The article aims to describe the implementation of these two rural pragmatic trials, identify challenges encountered in study implementation, and present lessons learned. We applied frameworks from implementation science, including the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), to demonstrate how pragmatic trial implementation mirrors implementation of evidence-based programs and practices, and can benefit from established implementation frameworks and strategies.
Results: Across 13 rural clinics in 10 states, both trials demonstrated the feasibility of integrating MOUD into primary care settings through pragmatic study designs closely aligned with routine clinical workflows. Principal challenges included limited clinic research capacity, staff stigma toward OUD treatment, communication barriers between local clinics and external TM vendors, and variable digital access. Solutions included engaging local champions, co-developing workflows tailored to each clinic’s operations, simplifying technology requirements, and emphasizing bi-directional communication among clinic, research, and vendor teams. Continuous technical assistance and protocol flexibility and adaptation were crucial for sustaining engagement and aligning study procedures with clinical realities. Findings demonstrated that rural clinics can feasibly implement TM-based MOUD coordination and extended-release buprenorphine with adequate support and contextual adaptation.
Conclusions: Lessons from CTN-0102 and CTN-0102XR underscore that pragmatic trials in rural settings benefit from early contextual assessment, engagement of community stakeholders, adaptable protocols, and strong implementation support. Applying implementation science frameworks facilitates solutions to real-world barriers and enhances study sustainability. Future CTN efforts should continue to prioritize rural site inclusion, capacity building, and equitable access to evidence-based OUD treatment.
Related protocols: CTN-0102, CTN-0102-XR