Comparing recruitment strategies in a study of acupuncture for chronic back pain
1 Group Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA
2 Departments of Family Medicine and Internal Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR 97239, USA
3 Division of Research, Northern California Kaiser-Permanente, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612, USA
4 Division of Extramural Research and Training, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
BMC Medical Research Methodology 2009, 9:69 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-69Published: 27 October 2009
Meeting recruitment goals is challenging for many clinical trials conducted in primary care populations. Little is known about how the use of different recruitment strategies affects the types of individuals choosing to participate or the conclusions of the study.
A secondary analysis was performed using data from participants recruited to a clinical trial evaluating acupuncture for chronic back pain among primary care patients in a large integrated health care organization. We used two recruitment methods: mailed letters of invitation and an advertisement in the health plan's magazine. For these two recruitment methods, we compared recruitment success (% randomized, treatment completers, drop outs and losses to follow-up), participant characteristics, and primary clinical outcomes. A linear regression model was used to test for interaction between treatment group and recruitment method.
Participants recruited via mailed letters closely resembled those responding to the advertisement in terms of demographic characteristics, most aspects of their back pain history and current episode and beliefs and expectations about acupuncture. No interaction between method of recruitment and treatment group was seen, suggesting that study outcomes were not affected by recruitment strategy.
In this trial, the two recruitment strategies yielded similar estimates of treatment effectiveness. However, because this finding may not apply to other recruitment strategies or trial circumstances, trials employing multiple recruitment strategies should evaluate the effect of recruitment strategy on outcome.
Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.