Cargando…

Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND: Recruiting patients to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often reported to be challenging, and the evidence base for effective interventions that could be used by staff (recruiters) undertaking recruitment is lacking. Although the experiences and perspectives of recruiters have been...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Farrar, Nicola, Elliott, Daisy, Houghton, Catherine, Jepson, Marcus, Mills, Nicola, Paramasivan, Sangeetha, Plumb, Lucy, Wade, Julia, Young, Bridget, Donovan, Jenny L., Rooshenas, Leila
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9585862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36266700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4
_version_ 1784813585777557504
author Farrar, Nicola
Elliott, Daisy
Houghton, Catherine
Jepson, Marcus
Mills, Nicola
Paramasivan, Sangeetha
Plumb, Lucy
Wade, Julia
Young, Bridget
Donovan, Jenny L.
Rooshenas, Leila
author_facet Farrar, Nicola
Elliott, Daisy
Houghton, Catherine
Jepson, Marcus
Mills, Nicola
Paramasivan, Sangeetha
Plumb, Lucy
Wade, Julia
Young, Bridget
Donovan, Jenny L.
Rooshenas, Leila
author_sort Farrar, Nicola
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recruiting patients to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often reported to be challenging, and the evidence base for effective interventions that could be used by staff (recruiters) undertaking recruitment is lacking. Although the experiences and perspectives of recruiters have been widely reported, an evidence synthesis is required in order to inform the development of future interventions. This paper aims to address this by systematically searching and synthesising the evidence on recruiters’ perspectives and experiences of recruiting patients into RCTs.  METHODS: A qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) following Thomas and Harden’s approach to thematic synthesis was conducted. The Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ORRCA and Web of Science electronic databases were searched. Studies were sampled to ensure that the focus of the research was aligned with the phenomena of interest of the QES, their methodological relevance to the QES question, and to include variation across the clinical areas of the studies. The GRADE CERQual framework was used to assess confidence in the review findings. RESULTS: In total, 9316 studies were identified for screening, which resulted in 128 eligible papers. The application of the QES sampling strategy resulted in 30 papers being included in the final analysis. Five overlapping themes were identified which highlighted the complex manner in which recruiters experience RCT recruitment: (1) recruiting to RCTs in a clinical environment, (2) enthusiasm for the RCT, (3) making judgements about whether to approach a patient, (4) communication challenges, (5) interplay between recruiter and professional roles. CONCLUSIONS: This QES identified factors which contribute to the complexities that recruiters can face in day-to-day clinical settings, and the influence recruiters and non-recruiting healthcare professionals have on opportunities afforded to patients for RCT participation. It has reinforced the importance of considering the clinical setting in its entirety when planning future RCTs and indicated the need to better normalise and support research if it is to become part of day-to-day practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020141297 (registered 11/02/2020). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9585862
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95858622022-10-22 Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis Farrar, Nicola Elliott, Daisy Houghton, Catherine Jepson, Marcus Mills, Nicola Paramasivan, Sangeetha Plumb, Lucy Wade, Julia Young, Bridget Donovan, Jenny L. Rooshenas, Leila Trials Research BACKGROUND: Recruiting patients to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often reported to be challenging, and the evidence base for effective interventions that could be used by staff (recruiters) undertaking recruitment is lacking. Although the experiences and perspectives of recruiters have been widely reported, an evidence synthesis is required in order to inform the development of future interventions. This paper aims to address this by systematically searching and synthesising the evidence on recruiters’ perspectives and experiences of recruiting patients into RCTs.  METHODS: A qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) following Thomas and Harden’s approach to thematic synthesis was conducted. The Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ORRCA and Web of Science electronic databases were searched. Studies were sampled to ensure that the focus of the research was aligned with the phenomena of interest of the QES, their methodological relevance to the QES question, and to include variation across the clinical areas of the studies. The GRADE CERQual framework was used to assess confidence in the review findings. RESULTS: In total, 9316 studies were identified for screening, which resulted in 128 eligible papers. The application of the QES sampling strategy resulted in 30 papers being included in the final analysis. Five overlapping themes were identified which highlighted the complex manner in which recruiters experience RCT recruitment: (1) recruiting to RCTs in a clinical environment, (2) enthusiasm for the RCT, (3) making judgements about whether to approach a patient, (4) communication challenges, (5) interplay between recruiter and professional roles. CONCLUSIONS: This QES identified factors which contribute to the complexities that recruiters can face in day-to-day clinical settings, and the influence recruiters and non-recruiting healthcare professionals have on opportunities afforded to patients for RCT participation. It has reinforced the importance of considering the clinical setting in its entirety when planning future RCTs and indicated the need to better normalise and support research if it is to become part of day-to-day practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020141297 (registered 11/02/2020). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4. BioMed Central 2022-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9585862/ /pubmed/36266700 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Farrar, Nicola
Elliott, Daisy
Houghton, Catherine
Jepson, Marcus
Mills, Nicola
Paramasivan, Sangeetha
Plumb, Lucy
Wade, Julia
Young, Bridget
Donovan, Jenny L.
Rooshenas, Leila
Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title_full Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title_fullStr Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title_full_unstemmed Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title_short Understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
title_sort understanding the perspectives of recruiters is key to improving randomised controlled trial enrolment: a qualitative evidence synthesis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9585862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36266700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06818-4
work_keys_str_mv AT farrarnicola understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT elliottdaisy understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT houghtoncatherine understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT jepsonmarcus understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT millsnicola understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT paramasivansangeetha understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT plumblucy understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT wadejulia understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT youngbridget understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT donovanjennyl understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT rooshenasleila understandingtheperspectivesofrecruitersiskeytoimprovingrandomisedcontrolledtrialenrolmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis