Recruiting and retaining general practitioners to a primary care asthma-intervention study in Australia
Smita Shah A B I , Jessica K. Roydhouse C , Brett G. Toelle B D , Craig M. Mellis B , Christine R. Jenkins B D , Peter Edwards E and Susan M. Sawyer F G HA Primary Health Care Education and Research Unit, Sydney West Local Health District, Sydney, NSW 2145, Australia.
B Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
C Sydney Nursing School, CNRU, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
D Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia.
E Holroyd Medical Practice, Merrylands, NSW 2160, Australia.
F Department of Paediatrics, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Vic. 3052, Australia.
G Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic. 3052, Australia.
H Centre for Adolescent Health, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Vic. 3052, Australia.
I Corresponding author. Email: smita_shah@wsahs.nsw.gov.au
Australian Journal of Primary Health 20(1) 98-102 https://doi.org/10.1071/PY12093
Submitted: 17 July 2012 Accepted: 27 November 2012 Published: 21 December 2012
Abstract
The need for more evidence-based interventions in primary care is clear. However, it is challenging to recruit general practitioners (GPs) for interventional research. This paper reports on the evaluation of three methods of recruitment that were sequentially used to recruit GPs for a randomised controlled trial of an asthma communication and education intervention in Australia. The recruitment methods (RMs) were: general practices were contacted by project staff from a Department of General Practice, University of Sydney (RM1); general practices were contacted by staff from an independent research organisation (RM2); and general practices were contacted by a medical peer (chief investigator) (RM3). A GP was defined as ‘recruited’ once they consented and were randomised to a group, and ‘retained’ if they provided baseline data and did not notify staff of their intention to withdraw at any time during the 12-month study. RM1 was used for the first 6 months, during which 34 (4%) GPs were recruited and 21 (62%) retained from a total of 953 invitations. RM2 was then used for the next 5 months, during which 32 (6%) GPs were recruited and 26 (81%) were retained. Finally over the next 7 months, RM3 recruited 84 (12%) GPs and retained 75 (89%) GPs. In conclusion, use of a medical peer as the first contact was associated with the highest recruitment and retention rate.
Additional keywords: general practice, intervention studies, recruitment.
References
Asch S, Connor SE, Hamilton EG, Fox SA (2000) Problems in recruiting community-based physicians for health services research. Journal of General Internal Medicine 15, 591–599.| Problems in recruiting community-based physicians for health services research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FhtFajsw%3D%3D&md5=bec01fbf357377a920173ea91cb3dd56CAS |
Bower P, Wilson S, Mathers N (2007) How often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays? Family Practice 24, 601–603.
| How often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Britt H, Miller GC, Charles J, Henderson J, Bayram C, Harrison C, Valenti L, Fahridin S, Pan Y, O’Halloran J (2008) ‘General practice activity in Australia 1998–99 to 2007–08: 10 year data tables.’ (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: Canberra)
Ellis SD, Bertoni AG, Bonds DE, Clinch R, Balasubramanyam A, Blackwell C, Chen H, Lischke M, Goff DC (2007) Value of recruitment strategies used in a primary care practise-based trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials 28, 258–267.
| Value of recruitment strategies used in a primary care practise-based trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Foy R, Parry J, Duggan A, Delaney B, Wilson S, Lewin-van den Broek N, Lassen A, Vickers L, Myres P (2003) How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomized controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies. Family Practice 20, 83–92.
| How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomized controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s%2FnslegsA%3D%3D&md5=44051befe7d992f8131931e15d5dea3cCAS |
Goodyear-Smith F, York D, Petousis-Harris H, Turner N, Copp J, Kerse N, Grant C (2009) Recruitment of practices in primary care research: the long and the short of it. Family Practice 26, 128–136.
| Recruitment of practices in primary care research: the long and the short of it.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Heywood A, Mudge P, Ring I, Sanson-Fisher R (1995) Reducing systematic bias in studies of general practitioners in research. Family Practice 12, 227–231.
| Reducing systematic bias in studies of general practitioners in research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK28%2Fms1WktQ%3D%3D&md5=d9417a2d6e1059bc91bbc593e80895f5CAS |
Jones KM, Dixon ME, Falkingham L, Pitemann L, Dixon JB (2011) Barriers to recruitment of professionals into a general practice childhood obesity program. Australian Journal of Primary Health 17, 156–161.
| Barriers to recruitment of professionals into a general practice childhood obesity program.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jones KM, Dixon ME, Dixon JB (2012) General practice research – does gender affect the decision to participate? Australian Family Physician 41, 419–423.
Minas H, Klimidis S, Kokanovic R (2005) Mental health research in general practice. Australasian Psychiatry 13, 181–184.
Pearl A, Wright S, Gamble G, Doughty R, Sharpe N (2003) Randomised trials in general practice − a New Zealand experience in recruitment. The New Zealand Medical Journal 116, 681–687.
Primary Health Care Research & Information Service (2012) ‘Key Division of General Practice characteristics 2007–2008 from the PHC RIS 2007–8 Annual Survey of Divisions.’ (PHC RIS: Bedford Park, SA) Available at http://www.phcris.org.au/products/asd/keycharacteristic/index.php [Verified 19 October 2012]
Rosemann T, Szecsenyi J (2004) General practitioners’ attitudes towards research in primary care: qualitative results of a cross sectional study. BMC Family Practice 5, 31
Roydhouse JK, Shah S, Toelle BG, Sawyer SM, Mellis CM, Usherwood TP, Edwards P, Jenkins CR (2011) A snapshot of general practitioner attitudes, levels of confidence and self-reported paediatric asthma management practice. Australian Journal of Primary Health 17, 288–293.
| A snapshot of general practitioner attitudes, levels of confidence and self-reported paediatric asthma management practice.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sellors J, Cosby R, Trim K, Kaczorowski J, Howard M, Hardcastle L, Sellors C, Woodward C, , Seniors Medication Assessment Research Trial (SMART) Group (2002) Recruiting family physicians and patients for a clinical trial: lessons learned. Family Practice 19, 99–104.
| Recruiting family physicians and patients for a clinical trial: lessons learned.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shah S, Toelle BG, Sawyer SM, Roydhouse JK, Edwards P, Usherwood T, Jenkins CR (2010) Feasibility study of a communication and education asthma intervention for general practitioners in Australia. Australian Journal of Primary Health 16, 75–80.
| Feasibility study of a communication and education asthma intervention for general practitioners in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shah S, Sawyer SM, Toelle BG, Mellis CM, Peat JK, Lagleva M, Usherwood TP, Jenkins CR (2011) Improving paediatric asthma outcomes in primary health: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Medical Journal of Australia 195, 405–409.
Tognoni G, Alli C, Avanzini F, Bettelli G, Colombo F, Corso R, Marchioli R, Zussino A (1991) Randomised clinical trials in general practice: lessons from a failure. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.) 303, 969–971.
| Randomised clinical trials in general practice: lessons from a failure.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK38%2Fmtlantw%3D%3D&md5=f75a4531ff74f12f2bf8f10f2ddfc041CAS |
van der Wouden JC, Blankenstein AH, Huibers MJ, van der Windt DA, Stalman WA, Verhagen AP (2007) Survey among 78 studies showed that Lasagna’s law holds in Dutch primary care research. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60, 819–824.
| Survey among 78 studies showed that Lasagna’s law holds in Dutch primary care research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Veitch C, Hollins J, Worley P, Mitchell G (2001) General practice research: problems and solutions in participant recruitment and retention. Australian Family Physician 30, 399–406.
Watson JM, Torgerson DJ (2006) Increasing recruitment to randomised trials: a review of randomised controlled trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology 6, 34
Williamson MK, Pirkis J, Pfaff JJ, Tyson O, Sim M, Kerse N, Lautenschlager NT, Stocks NP, Almeida OP (2007) Recruiting and retaining GPs and patients in intervention studies: the DEPS-GP project as a case study. BMC Medical Research Methodology 7, 42
| Recruiting and retaining GPs and patients in intervention studies: the DEPS-GP project as a case study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Yallop JJ, McAvoy BR, Croucher JL, Tonkin A, Piterman L, Chat SG (2006) Primary health care research − essential but disadvantaged. Medical Journal of Australia 185, 118–120.
