Recruitment and inclusion procedures as “pain killers” in clinical trials?
Open Access
- 1 July 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Journal of Pain Research
- Vol. ume 12, 2027-2037
- https://doi.org/10.2147/jpr.s204259
Abstract
Background: Recruitment and inclusion procedures in clinical trials are time critical. This holds particularly true for studies investigating patients with fluctuating symptom patterns, like those with chronic neck pain. In a feasibility study on neck pain, we found a clinically relevant decrease in pain ratings within the recruitment period. This paper analyses the phenomenon and gives recommendations for recruitment procedures in clinical trials on pain. Methods: Changes in pain intensity scores of 44 chronic neck pain patients (6 males and 36 females; mean age: 45.3±13.2 years) between the first telephone contact and baseline assessment were analyzed. Inclusion criterion was a mean pain intensity of ≥40 on a 0–100 numerical rating scale during the last three months. Statistical analyses were performed using ANOVA and parametric/non-parametric correlation coefficients. Results: Average pain intensity score decreased significantly from 60.3±13.3 at telephone interview to 38.1±21.7 at baseline assessment. This represents a relative change of 36.8%. A weak but significant negative correlation was found between number of days between assessments and pain rating differences. There was a positive correlation between change of pain intensity and the pain level at the first contact, indicating that the decreased pain ratings over time were also dependent on the initial pain rating. Conclusions: The clinically significant changes in pain intensity were weakly related to waiting time and moderately dependent on initial pain intensity, suggesting regression to the mean. The natural course of the disease and the Hawthorne effect are also discussed as contributing factors.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policyBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
- A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and howBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
- New Insights into the Placebo and Nocebo ResponsesNeuron, 2008
- Is patient satisfaction sensitive to changes in the quality of care? An exploitation of the Hawthorne effectJournal of Health Economics, 2008
- Pain measurement in patients with low back painNature Clinical Practice Rheumatology, 2007
- The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trialBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2007
- Quantitative sensory testing: a comprehensive protocol for clinical trialsEuropean journal of pain, 2006
- Regression to the MeanSports Medicine, 2003
- Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a “trial effect”Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2001
- How to deal with regression to the mean in intervention studiesThe Lancet, 1996