Recruitment difficulties in obstetric trials: A case study and review
- 28 October 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Vol. 54 (6), 546-552
- https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12233
Abstract
BackgroundThe CONSORT statement calls for complete data on flow of participants, including all losses and exclusions. Incomplete reporting of flow into trials versus flow through trials is not uncommon. Where complete data exist in obstetric trials, poor recruitment seems a recurring theme. AimsTo explore difficulties in recruitment and differences between assessed-but-not-recruited and included women to improve future trial participation, using a case study of a recently published randomised trial of outpatient Foley catheter versus inpatient PGE2 gel for cervical ripening. Materials & MethodsThe assessed-but-not-recruited population of an obstetric trial (ACTRN:12609000420246) was prospectively studied for reasons for noninclusion, demographic data and pregnancy outcome. Women assessed-but-not-recruited due to declined consent or obstetrician declined participation were compared to included women. Main outcome measures included demographic and outcome differences associated with trial participation. ResultsOf 468 assessed participants, 220 (47%) were not eligible by exclusion criteria (potential trial factor' recruitment difficulties), 147 (31%) declined consent (n=100, participant factor') or their obstetrician declined participation (n=47, clinician factor') and 101 (22%) were included. Declining women were more likely than participants to be parous (24 vs 10%, P<0.05), induced for nonmedical reasons (18 vs 4%, P<0.001), privately admitted (31 vs 3%, P<0.001) and have longer inpatient stay (4.9 vs 4.2days, P<0.05). ConclusionThe high assessed-but-not-recruited rate highlights important issues with external validity and feasibility when conducting obstetric trials, including recruitment difficulties related to participant, clinician and trial factors. Assessed: recruited ratios and demographic and outcome differences need consideration in planning and interpretation of randomised trials.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Outpatient Foley catheter versus inpatient prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour: a randomised trialBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2013
- Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journalsEmergencias, 2012
- Exploring treatment preferences facilitated recruitment to randomized controlled trialsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011
- A randomised controlled trial of caseload midwifery care: M@NGO (Midwives @ New Group practice Options)BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2011
- Recruitment and retention of women in a large randomized control trial to reduce repeat preterm births: the Philadelphia Collaborative Preterm Prevention ProjectBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
- Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trialsEmergencias, 2010
- A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Magnesium Sulfate for the Prevention of Cerebral PalsyThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- A thematic analysis of factors influencing recruitment to maternal and perinatal trialsBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2008
- Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High-Impact General Medical JournalsJama-Journal Of The American Medical Association, 2007