Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

An optimised patient information sheet did not significantly increase recruitment or retention in a falls prevention study: an embedded randomised recruitment trial

Authors: Sarah Cockayne, Caroline Fairhurst, Joy Adamson, Catherine Hewitt, Robin Hull, Kate Hicks, Anne-Maree Keenan, Sarah E. Lamb, Lorraine Green, Caroline McIntosh, Hylton B. Menz, Anthony C. Redmond, Sara Rodgers, David J. Torgerson, Wesley Vernon, Judith Watson, Peter Knapp, Jo Rick, Peter Bower, Sandra Eldridge, Vichithranie W. Madurasinghe, Jonathan Graffy

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Background

Randomised controlled trials are generally regarded as the ‘gold standard’ experimental design to determine the effectiveness of an intervention. Unfortunately, many trials either fail to recruit sufficient numbers of participants, or recruitment takes longer than anticipated. The current embedded trial evaluates the effectiveness of optimised patient information sheets on recruitment of participants in a falls prevention trial.

Methods

A three-arm, embedded randomised methodology trial was conducted within the National Institute for Health Research-funded REducing Falls with ORthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) cohort randomised controlled trial. Routine National Health Service podiatry patients over the age of 65 were randomised to receive either the control patient information sheet (PIS) for the host trial or one of two optimised versions, a bespoke user-tested PIS or a template-developed PIS. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group who went on to be randomised to the host trial.

Results

Six thousand and nine hundred patients were randomised 1:1:1 into the embedded trial. A total of 193 (2.8%) went on to be randomised into the main REFORM trial (control n = 62, template-developed n = 68; bespoke user-tested n = 63). Information sheet allocation did not improve recruitment to the trial (odds ratios for the three pairwise comparisons: template vs control 1.10 (95% CI 0.77–1.56, p = 0.60); user-tested vs control 1.01 (95% CI 0.71–1.45, p = 0.94); and user-tested vs template 0.92 (95% CI 0.65–1.31, p = 0.65)).

Conclusions

This embedded methodology trial has demonstrated limited evidence as to the benefit of using optimised information materials on recruitment and retention rates in the REFORM study.

Trial registration

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry, ISRCTN68240461. Registered on 01 July 2011.

Available only for authorised users

McDonald A, Knight R, Campbell M, 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Treweek S, Lockhart P, Pitkethly M, et al. Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2013;3(2). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002360.

Rick J, Graffy J, Knapp P, et al. Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (START): study protocol for embedded, randomized controlled trials. Trials. 2014;15(1):407.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Terblanche M, Burgess L. Examining the readability of patient-informed consent forms. J Clin Trials. 2010;2:157–62.

Gillies K, Huang W, Skea Z, et al. Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials: a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation. Trials. 2014;15(1):62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Brierley G, Richardson R, Torgerson DJ. Using short information leaflets as recruitment tools did not improve recruitment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(2):147–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.005.CrossRefPubMed

Knapp P, Raynor DK, Silcock J, et al. Can user testing of a clinical trial patient information sheet make it fit-for-purpose? - a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med. 2011;9(1):89.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Raynor DK, Knapp P, Silcock J, et al. “User-testing” as a method for testing the fitness-for-purpose of written medicine information. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;83(3):404–10.CrossRefPubMed

Boyd A, Tilling K, Cornish R, et al. Professionally designed information materials and telephone reminders improved consent response rates: evidence from an RCT nested within a cohort study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(8):877–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.03.014.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Bower P, Brueton V, Gamble C, et al. Interventions to improve recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a survey and workshop to assess current practice and future priorities. Trials. 2014;15(1):399.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Cockayne S, Adamson J, Corbacho Martin B, et al. The REFORM study protocol: a cohort randomised controlled trial of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for the prevention of falls in older people. BMJ Open. 2014;4(12). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006977.

12.

Relton C, Torgerson D, O’Cathain A, et al. Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the “cohort multiple randomised controlled trial” design. BMJ. 2010;340:c1066.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Mitchell N, Hewitt C, Adamson J, et al. A randomised evaluation of CollAborative care and active surveillance for Screen-Positive EldeRs with sub-threshold depression (CASPER): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2011;12(225):6215–12.

14.

Ives NJ, Troop M, Waters A, et al. Does an HIV clinical trial information booklet improve patient knowledge and understanding of HIV clinical trials? HIV Med. 2001;2(4):241–9.CrossRefPubMed

Title: An optimised patient information sheet did not significantly increase recruitment or retention in a falls prevention study: an embedded randomised recruitment trial
Authors: Sarah Cockayne
Caroline Fairhurst
Joy Adamson
Catherine Hewitt
Robin Hull
Kate Hicks
Anne-Maree Keenan
Sarah E. Lamb
Lorraine Green
Caroline McIntosh
Hylton B. Menz
Anthony C. Redmond
Sara Rodgers
David J. Torgerson
Wesley Vernon
Judith Watson
Peter Knapp
Jo Rick
Peter Bower
Sandra Eldridge
Vichithranie W. Madurasinghe
Jonathan Graffy
Publication date: 01-12-2017
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Trials / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1797-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

An optimised patient information sheet did not significantly increase recruitment or retention in a falls prevention study: an embedded randomised recruitment trial

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Quality of transurethral resection of bladder tumor procedure influenced a phase III trial comparing the effect of KLH and mitomycin C

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Esoteric Connective Tissue Therapy for chronic low back pain to reduce pain, and improve functionality and general well-being compared with physiotherapy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

A proof-of-concept investigation into ketamine as a pharmacological treatment for alcohol dependence: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Group physiotherapy compared to individual physiotherapy to treat urinary incontinence in aging women: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Reducing depressive symptomatology with a smartphone app: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Participant recruitment and retention in longitudinal preconception randomized trials: lessons learnt from the Calcium And Pre-eclampsia (CAP) trial