Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Methods of Recruitment for Surgical and Perioperative Randomized Controlled Trials: A Rapid Review

  • Scientific Review
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Due to the complex nature of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reaching target recruitment can be challenging. The primary objective was to report on characteristics of successful pilot surgical and perioperative RCTs and the methodological strategies implemented to optimize recruitment. The secondary objective was to provide recommendations for successful recruitment strategies for future surgical RCTs. Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Web of Science (via Ovid) databases were searched from 2012 to 2022. This review included surgical and perioperative pilot studies that met their recruitment targets. Study and recruitment characteristics were summarized, and potential relationships between study design and recruitment rate were assessed. Optimized recruitment strategies were extracted when reported. Of 4156 total articles identified, 255 underwent full-text screening, and 52 articles were included. Of the included pilot studies, 21% (n = 11) did not indicate a target sample size or recruitment rate. Recruitment methods were minimally reported in pilot studies for perioperative or surgical RCTs. Strategies to optimize recruitment included internal iterative evaluations of the recorded recruitment appointments and staged introduction of the study. Recruitment rate was not associated with invasiveness of intervention or burden of participation. Patient involvement is absent from current reports on methodological design and offers valuable opportunity to optimize recruitment. Recruitment strategies in perioperative and surgical RCTs can be optimized with iterative qualitative evaluation of the recruitment methods with input from the interdisciplinary research team.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Elliott D, Husbands S, Hamdy FC et al (2017) Understanding and improving recruitment to randomised controlled trials: qualitative research approaches. Eur Urol 72:789–798

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kasenda B, Liu J, Jiang Y et al (2020) Prediction of RECRUITment in randomized clinical trials (RECRUIT-IT)-rationale and design for an international collaborative study. Trials 21:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wartolowska K, Collins GS, Hopewell S et al (2016) Feasibility of surgical randomised controlled trials with a placebo arm: a systematic review. BMJ Open 6:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blencowe NS, Cook JA, Pinkney T et al (2017) Delivering successful randomized controlled trials in surgery: methods to optimize collaboration and study design. Clin Trials 14:211–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rosenthal R, Kasenda B, Dell-Kuster S et al (2015) Completion and publication rates of randomized controlled trials in surgery: an empirical study. Ann Surg 262:68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Davies L, Beard D, Cook JA et al (2021) The challenge of equipoise in trials with a surgical and non-surgical comparison: a qualitative synthesis using meta-ethnography. Trials 22:1–24

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Phelps EE, Tutton E, Griffin X et al (2020) A mixed-methods systematic review of patients’ experience of being invited to participate in surgical randomised controlled trials. Soc Sci Med 253:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hinwood M, Wall L, Lang D et al (2022) Patient and clinician characteristics and preferences for increasing participation in placebo surgery trials: a scoping review of attributes to inform a discrete choice experimen. Trials 23:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ingram J, Beasant L, Benson J et al (2022) The challenge of equipoise: qualitative interviews exploring the views of health professionals and women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer on recruitment to a surgical randomised controlled feasibility trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud 8:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Needham J, Taylor J, Nomikos D (2021) Integrating patient-centred research in the Canadian cancer trials group. Curr Oncol 28:630–639

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Fairhurst K, Blazeby JM, Potter S et al (2019) Value of surgical pilot and feasibility study protocols. Br J Surg 106:968–978

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cousins S, Gormley A, Chalmers K et al (2021) A systematic review of placebo-controlled trials of surgery to examine pilot and feasibility work conducted to inform their design and conduct. Int Prospect Regist Syst Rev 95:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  13. Whitehead AL, Julious SA, Cooper CL et al (2016) Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable. Stat Methods Med Res 25:1057–1073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Davis TRC, Tan W, Harrison EF et al (2020) A randomised feasibility trial comparing needle fasciotomy with limited fasciectomy treatment for Dupuytren’s contractures. Pilot Feasibility Stud 6:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Metcalfe C, Avery K, Berrisford R et al (2016) Comparing open and minimally invasive surgical procedures for oesophagectomy in the treatment of cancer: the romio (randomised oesophagectomy: Minimally invasive or open) feasibility study and pilot trial. Health Technol Assess 20:1–100

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Browne RH (1995) On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med 14:1933–1940

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kieser M, Wassmer G (1996) On the use of the upper confidence limit for the variance from a pilot sample for sample size determination. Biom J 38:941–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dawn Teare M, Dimairo M, Shephard N et al (2014) Sample size requirements to estimate key design parameters from external pilot randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. Trials 15:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sim J, Lewis M (2012) The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol 65:301–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Julious SA (2005) Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharm Stat 4:287–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Donovan JL, Jepson M, Rooshenas L et al (2022) Development of a new adapted QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI-Two) for rapid application to RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls—to identify previously hidden barriers and improve recruitment. Trials 23:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hamilton DW, De Salis I, Donovan JL et al (2013) The recruitment of patients to trials in head and neck cancer: a qualitative study of the EaStER trial of treatments for early laryngeal cancer. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 270:2333–2337

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2006) A systematic review of reasons for nonentry of eligible patients into surgical randomized controlled trials. Surgery 139:469–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scantlebury A, McDaid C, Brealey S et al (2021) Embedding qualitative research in randomised controlled trials to improve recruitment: findings from two recruitment optimisation studies of orthopaedic surgical trials. Trials 22:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Crocker JC, Ricci-Cabello I, Parker A et al (2018) Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 363:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nicholls SG, Fox G, Monfaredi Z et al (2022) The impact of patient engagement on trials and trialists in Ontario, Canada: an interview study with IMPACT awardees. Res Involv Engagem 8:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mullins CD, Vandigo J, Zheng Z et al (2014) Patient-centeredness in the design of clinical trials. Value Heal 17:471–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Prubjot Gill, a reference librarian at UBC, advised on the development of the search strategy.

Funding

This research received no specific Grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    Maya Morton Ninomiya & Jenna Hiemstra

  2. Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, 2221 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2B5, Canada

    Emma Nicholson & Kathryn V. Isaac

Authors
  1. Maya Morton Ninomiya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jenna Hiemstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emma Nicholson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathryn V. Isaac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathryn V. Isaac.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ninomiya, M.M., Hiemstra, J., Nicholson, E. et al. Methods of Recruitment for Surgical and Perioperative Randomized Controlled Trials: A Rapid Review. World J Surg 47, 2659–2667 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-023-07124-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-023-07124-z

Search

Navigation