Family Practice Vol. 20, No. 1, 83-92
© Oxford University Press 2003
Clinical Research |
How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomized controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies
Department of Reproductive and Developmental Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH3 9ET,
a Health Impact Assessment Research Unit, Department of Public Health, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK,
b University of Newcastle, Department of Gastroenterology, John Hunter Hospital, New South Wales, Australia,
c Department of Primary Care and General Practice, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK,
d Department of General Practice, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
e Department of Medical Gastroenterology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark,
f University of Plymouth, Bowyer Building, Torbay Hospital, Lawes Bridge, Torquay TQ2 7AA and
g The Surgery, 15 High Street, Overton on Dee, Wrexham LL13 0ED, UK.
Correspondence to Dr Robbie Foy, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle, 21 Claremont Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AA, UK; E-mail: R.C.Foy{at}newcastle.ac.uk
Background. Failure to recruit adequate numbers of participants represents a major barrier to the completion of randomized controlled trials in primary care and is associated with substantial opportunity costs. However, uncertainty exists regarding the relative effectiveness of different methods to promote recruitment.
Objectives. The purpose of this study was to estimate the proportion of strategies used to promote patient recruitment to randomized controlled trials in primary care that are evidence based.
Methods. Investigators from seven primary care-based clinical trials of dyspepsia management aiming to recruit a total of 6070 patients participated. Following a survey of trial organization, a Delphi technique was used to reach consensus on levels of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions or organizational characteristics in influencing recruitment. The main outcome measures were the proportions of interventions or organizational characteristics for influencing patient recruitment that are based upon randomized controlled trials, on convincing non-experimental evidence or meeting neither of these criteria.
Results. Out of a total of 56 interventions used across the trials, 35 (63%) were judged as evidence based. Out of a total of 29 organizational characteristics possessed by the trials, five (17%) were judged as evidence based. Across the seven dyspepsia trials, the presence of ‘favourable’ organizational characteristics appeared to be important contributors towards successful recruitment.
Conclusions. A wide range of interventions and organizational characteristics with the potential to promote recruitment were used or possessed by seven primary care trials. Many were not evidence based. Our experience suggests that organizational characteristics could be more influential in trial recruitment than the use of specific interventions. Given the costs of primary care-based trials, researchers need more rigorous evidence to inform recruitment strategies.
Keywords. Primary care, randomized controlled trials, recruitment.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J.E. Clarkson, S. Turner, J.M. Grimshaw, C.R. Ramsay, M. Johnston, A. Scott, D. Bonetti, C.J. Tilley, G. Maclennan, R. Ibbetson, et al. Changing Clinicians' Behavior: a Randomized Controlled Trial of Fees and Education J. Dent. Res., July 1, 2008; 87(7): 640 - 644. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Bower, S. Wilson, and N. Mathers Short report: How often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays? Fam. Pract., December 1, 2007; 24(6): 601 - 603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Fletcher, J. Mant, R. Holder, D. Fitzmaurice, G. Y. Lip, and F. R. Hobbs An analysis of factors that predict patient consent to take part in a randomized controlled trial Fam. Pract., August 1, 2007; 24(4): 388 - 394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Blanton, D. M Morris, M. G Prettyman, K. McCulloch, S. Redmond, K. E Light, and S. L Wolf Lessons Learned in Participant Recruitment and Retention: The EXCITE Trial Physical Therapy, November 1, 2006; 86(11): 1520 - 1533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. A. Peterson, P. Fontaine, and S. Speedie The Electronic Primary Care Research Network (ePCRN): A New Era in Practice-based Research J Am Board Fam Med, January 1, 2006; 19(1): 93 - 97. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. S. Elkins, T. Khatabi, L. Fung, J. Rootenberg, and S. C. Johnston Recruiting Subjects for Acute Stroke Trials: A Meta-Analysis Stroke, January 1, 2006; 37(1): 123 - 128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. P. Y. Hichens, J. R. Sandy, H. N. Rowland, A. G. McNair, S. Clark, D. Hills, P. Huntley, S. Ransome, M. Forty, J. Peak, et al. Practical aspects to undertaking research in the primary care setting: experience from two studies J. Orthod., December 1, 2005; 32(4): 262 - 268. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. C Dean, C. E Harper, F. P Cappuccio, E. Rink, C. Dirckx, J. Arnout, F. Zito, L. Iacoviello, and on behalf of the European Collaborative Group of t The challenges of cross-national research in primary health care across Europe Fam. Pract., June 1, 2005; 22(3): 341 - 346. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Prout, C. Butler, P. Kinnersley, M. Robling, K. Hood, and R. Tudor-Jones A qualitative evaluation of implementing a randomized controlled trial in general practice Fam. Pract., December 1, 2003; 20(6): 675 - 681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|