Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Feb;56(523):127-33.

Comparison of two recruitment strategies for patients with chronic shoulder complaints

Jacques J X R Geraets  1 , Imelda J M de Groot, Mariëlle E J B Goossens, Camiel P C de Bruijn, Rob A de Bie, Wim J A van den Heuvel, Geert-Jan Dinant
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of two recruitment strategies for patients with chronic shoulder complaints

Jacques J X R Geraets et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2006 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Recruiting adequate numbers of participants represents a major problem to the completion of randomised clinical trials in primary care. Information on different recruitment strategies applied in one trial is scarce.

Aim: To evaluate the application of two recruitment strategies in one trial.

Design of study: The study was performed within the framework of a randomised clinical trial on the effectiveness of a behavioural treatment for patients with chronic shoulder complaints.

Setting: Thirty-two general practices in the Netherlands.

Method: Patients recruited during a consultation with their GP for chronic shoulder complaints were compared with patients recruited by advertisement in a local newspaper as regards baseline characteristics, withdrawals (drop-outs and losses to follow-up) and post-treatment clinical outcomes.

Results: Patients recruited by the GPs (n = 83) were similar to those recruited by advertisement (n = 83) in terms of demographic characteristics and clinical outcome measures at baseline, but differed slightly in disease characteristics and treatment preferences. Recruitment strategy was not related to reasons for or numbers of withdrawals. Improvements on outcome measures were greater in patients recruited by the GPs, irrespective of allocated treatment. Results on the clinical effectiveness of treatments at the end of the treatment period or during follow-up were neither modified by recruitment strategy, nor by differences between the two strategy groups in patient characteristics found at baseline.

Conclusion: Using two recruitment strategies did not influence the outcomes on clinical effectiveness in this trial.However, recruitment strategy should be considered as a putative modifying factor in the design of a study.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of patients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Foy R, Parry J, Duggan A, et al. How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomized controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies. Fam Pract. 2003;20:83–92. - PubMed
    1. Boles M, Getchell WS, Feldman G, et al. Primary prevention studies and the healthy elderly: evaluating barriers to recruitment. J Community Health. 2000;25:279–292. - PubMed
    1. Damush TM, Weinberger M, Clark DO, et al. Acute low back pain self-management intervention for urban primary care patients: rationale, design, and predictors for participation. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;47:372–379. - PubMed
    1. Lloyd-Williams F, Mair F, Shiels C, et al. Why are patients in clinical trials of heart failure not like those we see in everyday practice? J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:1157–1162. - PubMed
    1. Nazemi H, Larkin AA, Sullivan MD, Katon W. Methodological issues in the recruitment of primary care patients with depression. Int J Psychiatry Med. 2001;31:277–288. - PubMed

Publication types