Enrollment Obstacles in a Randomized Controlled Trial: A Performance Survey of Enrollment in BEST-CLI Sites
- PMID: 31491479
- DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2019.08.069
Enrollment Obstacles in a Randomized Controlled Trial: A Performance Survey of Enrollment in BEST-CLI Sites
Abstract
Background: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable form of scientific evidence, they are challenging to complete because of a variety of enrollment obstacles. We evaluated obstacles in a large RCT by comparing survey results at high-performing sites (HPS) and low-performing sites (LPS).
Methods: The Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial is a prospective, pragmatic, multicenter, and multispecialty RCT that will compare clinical outcomes, quality of life, and cost in patients with CLI randomized to surgical bypass or endovascular therapy. BEST-CLI aims to enroll 2100 patients at 160 sites in North America, Europe, and New Zealand. We surveyed the 30 HPS and 30 LPS to assess perceptions of enrollment obstacles. HPS were defined by enrollment of 0.5 subjects or more per month or more than 8 total subjects enrolled. LPS were defined by enrollment of 0.1 subjects per month or only 1 subject total. Responses were compared by site performance status.
Results: There were 22 of 30 (73%) HPS and 14 of 30 (47%) LPS that answered the survey (P = 0.06), including 17 investigators and 31 coordinators. The mean total enrollment and rate of enrollment at HPS and LPS were 12.5 subjects at 1.5 subjects/month and 1.0 subject at 0.1 subjects/month, respectively. The most common barrier to enrollment at HPS was difficulty convincing patients and their families to participate (36%), whereas at LPS both difficulty convincing patients and difficulty motivating investigators to enroll (29% each) were most frequently cited. At HPS, the most common obstacle to consenting patients for the trial was patient/family having strong preference toward revascularization strategy (32%) and at LPS it was patient/family not wanting to have treatment chosen at random (36%). At 55% of HPS and 43% of LPS, the trial team was reported as extremely collaborative (P = 0.73), whereas 68% of HPS and 64% of LPS reported having identified a trial champion on their team (P = 1). The most restrictive perceived enrollment criterion at HPS was prior index limb stenting with significant restenosis (32%), whereas at LPS it was excessive risk for surgical bypass (43%). Materials to aid enrollment were used equally at HPS and LPS: patient brochures at 59% HPS and 64% LPS (P = 1); investigator talking points at 45% of HPS and 36% of LPS (P = 0.73).
Conclusions: Patient perceptions and investigator biases are significant challenges to enrollment in large RCTs. In the BEST-CLI trial, difficulty convincing patients and families to allow treatment randomization and difficulty in motivating investigators were major enrollment obstacles.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
The BEST-CLI trial is nearing the finish line and promises to be worth the wait.J Vasc Surg. 2019 Feb;69(2):470-481.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.05.255. J Vasc Surg. 2019. PMID: 30683195 Clinical Trial.
-
Design and Rationale of the Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) Trial.J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Jul 8;5(7):e003219. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003219. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016. PMID: 27402237 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison of specialties participating in the BEST-CLI trial to specialists treating peripheral arterial disease nationally.J Vasc Surg. 2019 May;69(5):1505-1509. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.08.188. J Vasc Surg. 2019. PMID: 31010516
-
Hybrid revascularization of complex multilevel disease: a paradigm shift in critical limb ischemia treatment.J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2014 Oct;55(5):613-23. Epub 2014 Jun 18. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2014. PMID: 24941240 Review.
-
Critical appraisal of surgical revascularization for critical limb ischemia.J Vasc Surg. 2013 Feb;57(2 Suppl):8S-13S. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.114. J Vasc Surg. 2013. PMID: 23336860 Review.
Cited by
-
Bench-to-Bedside in Vascular Medicine: Optimizing the Translational Pipeline for Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease.Circ Res. 2021 Jun 11;128(12):1927-1943. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318265. Epub 2021 Jun 10. Circ Res. 2021. PMID: 34110900 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.J Vasc Surg. 2022 May;75(5):1762-1775. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.11.057. Epub 2022 Jan 24. J Vasc Surg. 2022. PMID: 35085747 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding Study Drug Discontinuation Through EUCLID.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Jul 15;9:947645. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.947645. eCollection 2022. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022. PMID: 35928933 Free PMC article.
-
Contextualizing the BEST-CLI Trial Results in Clinical Practice.J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023 Jul-Aug;2(4):101036. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101036. Epub 2023 May 19. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023. PMID: 37575528 Free PMC article.
-
Surgical and Endovascular Therapies for Below-the-Knee Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Contemporary Review.J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024 Jan 29;3(3Part A):101268. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101268. eCollection 2024 Mar. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024. PMID: 39131787 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous