Embedding qualitative research in randomised controlled trials to improve recruitment: findings from two recruitment optimisation studies of orthopaedic surgical trials

on behalf of the ACTIVE and PRESTO study teams, Arabella Scantlebury*, Catriona McDaid, Stephen Brealey, Elizabeth Cook, Hemant Sharma, Arun Ranganathan, Joy Adamson

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Recruitment of patients is one of the main challenges when designing and conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Trials of rare injuries or those that include surgical interventions pose added challenges due to the small number of potentially eligible patients and issues with patient preferences and surgeon equipoise. We explore key issues to consider when recruiting to orthopaedic surgical trials from the perspective of staff and patients with the aim of informing the development of strategies to improve recruitment in future research.

Design: Two qualitative process evaluations of a UK-wide orthopaedic surgical RCT (ACTIVE) and mixed methods randomised feasibility study (PRESTO). Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted and data was analysed thematically.

Setting: NHS secondary care organisations throughout the UK. Interviews were undertaken via telephone.

Participants: Thirty-seven health professionals including UK-based spinal and orthopaedic surgeons and individuals involved in recruitment to the ACTIVE and PRESTO studies (e.g. research nurses, surgeons, physiotherapists). Twenty-two patients including patients who agreed to participate in the ACTIVE and PRESTO studies (n=15) and patients that declined participation in the ACTIVE study (n=7) were interviewed.

Results: We used a mixed methods systematic review of recruiting patients to randomised controlled trials as a framework for reporting and analysing our findings. Our findings mapped onto those identified in the systematic review and highlighted the importance of equipoise, randomisation, communication, patient’s circumstances, altruism and trust in clinical and research teams. Our findings also emphasised the importance of considering how eligibility criteria are operationalised and the impact of complex patient pathways when recruiting to surgical trials. In particular, the influence of health professionals, who are not involved in trial recruitment, on patients’ treatment preferences by suggesting they would receive a certain treatment ahead of recruitment consultations should not be underestimated.

Conclusions: A wealth of evidence exploring factors affecting recruitment to randomised controlled trials exists. A methodological shift is now required to ensure that this evidence is used by all those involved in recruitment and to ensure that existing knowledge is translated into methods for optimising recruitment to future trials.

Trial registration: ACTIVE: (ISRCTN98152560). Registered on 06/03/2018. PRESTO: (ISRCTN12094890). Registered on 22/02/2018,.

Original languageEnglish
Article number461
Number of pages13
JournalTrials
Volume22
Issue number1
Early online date17 Jul 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2021

Bibliographical note

Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).

Keywords

  • Orthopaedic
  • Process evaluation
  • Qualitative
  • Randomised controlled trial
  • Recruitment
  • Retention
  • Surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Embedding qualitative research in randomised controlled trials to improve recruitment: findings from two recruitment optimisation studies of orthopaedic surgical trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this