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
. 2023 Jul 20;18(7):e0288028.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288028. eCollection 2023.

Recruitment and retention interventions in surgical and wound care trials: A systematic review

Catherine Arundel  1 , Andrew Mott  1
Affiliations

Recruitment and retention interventions in surgical and wound care trials: A systematic review

Catherine Arundel et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Recruitment and retention to surgical trials has previously been reported to be problematic, resulting in research waste. Surgery often results in wounds, meaning these trials are likely to have similar populations. There is currently no systematic assessment of effective strategies for these populations and hence, systematic assessment of these was deemed to be of importance.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted. Studies were eligible if they were randomised controlled trials undertaken to test an intervention to improve recruitment or retention within a surgical or wound based host randomised controlled trial. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ORRCA Database and the Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT Repository Store were searched. Two independent reviewers screened the search results and extracted data for eligible studies using a piloted extraction form. A narrative synthesis was used due to a lack of heterogeneity between strategies which prevented meta-analysis.

Results: A total of 2133 records were identified which resulted in 13 ultimately being included in the review; seven on recruitment and six on retention. All included studies were based within surgical host trials. Four of the seven recruitment studies focussed on the provision of consent information to participants, one focussed on study set up and one on staff training, with only one relating to consent information finding any significant effect. A range of retention strategies were assessed by the included studies, however only two found (pen vs no pen, mailing strategies) found any significant effect.

Conclusion: The included studies within a trial were all conducted within surgical trials. There was significant variation in strategies used, and limited replications and therefore further assessment may be warranted. Given the lack of studies embedded within wound care trials, further studies in this area are recommended.

Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020205475).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. PRISMA flow diagram of screening.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Risk of bias assessment of included RCTs.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ioannidis JPA. Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology. 2008;19: 640–648. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31818131e7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jacques RM, Ahmed R, Harper J, Ranjan A, Saeed I, Simpson RM, et al.. Recruitment, consent and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials published in the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Journals Library (1997–2020). BMJ Open. 2022;12: e059230. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059230 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Walters SJ, Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby I, Bortolami O, Flight L, Hind D, Jacques RM, et al.. Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open. 2017;7: e015276. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015276 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sully BGO, Julious SA, Nicholl J. A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2013;14: 166. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-166 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. McDonald AM, Knight RC, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Grant AM, Cook JA, et al.. What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2006;7: 9. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-7-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types