Enhancing Recruitment Using Teleconference and Commitment Contract (ERUTECC): a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial within the EFFECTS trial
Abstract
Background: Two out of three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) fail to meet their recruitment goals. Recruitment to Efficacy oF Fluoxetine – a randomisEd Controlled Trial in Stroke (EFFECTS), fluoxetine for stroke recovery was slower than anticipated. We aimed to evaluate an intervention to improve recruitment to EFFECTS.
Methods: This stepped wedge, cluster randomised study investigated whether a teleconference with the study personnel and the head of department could enhance recruitment in the ongoing EFFECTS. We included 20 low- and medium recruiting active centres. We excluded high recruiting centres. All centres started as controls and were followed by 60 days of observation. We used block randomisation. The primary outcome was a 20% increase of recruitment within 60 days post intervention compared within 60 days pre intervention. Secondary outcomes were comparing recruitment between different types of centres, that is small versus large or experienced versus non-experienced centres, and university versus non-university hospitals. In exploratory analyses, recruitment within 30 days post versus 30 days pre intervention was compared.
Results: The recruitment increased by 10% at 60 days. We noticed a short-lived increase of 23% the first month. The increased recruitment was most pronounced in low-recruiting, small and non-university hospitals. The recruitment of patients increased after the first contact with the centres where we announced that there would be a conference.
Conclusion: A teleconference with the study personnel and the head of department increased the recruitment by 23% within 30 days and by 10%, 60 days post intervention in this embedded RCT. This implies that this structured intervention aimed at increased recruitment was short-lived and would need frequent repetitions in order to be effective.
Downloads
References
2. Berge E, Al-Shahi Salman R, van der Worp HB, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in stroke research. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16:399–408. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(17)30078-9
3. Tudur Smith C, Hickey H, Clarke M, et al. The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise. Trials. 2014;15:32. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-32
4. Kaur G, Smyth RL, Williamson P. Developing a survey of barriers and facilitators to recruitment in randomized controlled trials. Trials. 2012;13:218. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-218
5. Isaksson E, Wester P, Laska AC, et al. Identifying important barriers to recruitment of patients in randomised clinical studies using a questionnaire for study personnel. Trials. 2019;20:618. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3737-1
6. Mc Daid C, Hodges Z, Fayter D, et al. Increasing participation of cancer patients in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. Trials. 2006;7:16. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-7-16
7. Fletcher B, Gheorghe A, Moore D, et al. Improving the recruitment activity of clinicians in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000496. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000496
8. Bower P, Brueton V, Gamble C, et al. Interventions to improve recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a survey and workshop to assess current practice and future priorities. Trials. 2014;15:399. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-399
9. Treweek S, Lockhart P, Pitkethly M, et al. Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002360. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002360
10. Maxwell AE, Parker RA, Drever J, et al. Promoting Recruitment using Information Management Efficiently (PRIME): a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised trial of a complex recruitment intervention embedded within the REstart or Stop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial. Trials. 2017;18:623. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2355-z
11. Treweek S, Bevan S, Bower P, et al. Trial forge guidance 1: what is a Study Within A Trial (SWAT)? Trials. 2018;19:139. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2535-5
12. Lundström E, Isaksson E. Safety and efficacy of fluoxetine on functional recovery after acute stroke (EFFECTS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19:661–9. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(20)30219-2
13. Hemming K, Haines TP, Chilton PJ, et al. The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting. BMJ. 2015;350:h391. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h391
14. Davey C, Hargreaves J, Thompson JA, et al. Analysis and reporting of stepped wedge randomised controlled trials: synthesis and critical appraisal of published studies, 2010 to 2014. Trials. 2015;16:358. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0838-3
15. Lundström E, Isaksson E, Wester P, et al. Enhancing Recruitment Using Teleconference and Commitment Contract (ERUTECC): study protocol for a randomised, stepped-wedge cluster trial within the EFFECTS trial. Trials. 2018;19:14. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2367-8
16. Barrett R. A nurse’s primer on recruiting participants for clinical trials. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2002;29:1091–8. doi: 10.1188/02.Onf.1091-1098
17. Lengacher CA, Gonzalez LL, Giuliano R, et al. The process of clinical trials: a model for successful clinical trial participation. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2001;28:1115–20.
18. Kaur G, Smyth RL, Powell CV, Williamson P. A survey of facilitators and barriers to recruitment to the MAGNETIC trial. Trials. 2016;17:607. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1724-3
19. Berge E, Stapf C, Al-Shahi Salman R, et al. Methods to improve patient recruitment and retention in stroke trials. Int J Stroke. 2016;11:663–76. doi: 10.1177/1747493016641963
20. Asplund K, Sukhova M, Wester P, Stegmayr B. Diagnostic procedures, treatments, and outcomes in stroke patients admitted to different types of hospitals. Stroke. 2015;46:806–12. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.114.007212
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to Upsala Medical Society. Read the full Copyright- and Licensing Statement.
