Efficiency and Cost: E-Recruitment Is a Promising Method in Gynecological Trials

Abstract

BackgroundRecruitment of participants is crucial to the success of any trial as it can have a major impact on study costs, the duration of the study itself, and, more critically, trial failure. Given that vulvodynia particularly affects young women, the use of social media and e-recruitment could prove efficient for enrollment. AimTo compare the efficiency, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of three different recruitment methods. MethodsThe comparison data were collected as part of a bicentric randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of physiotherapy in comparison with topical lidocaine in 212 women suffering from provoked vestibulodynia. The recruitment methods included: (i) conventional methods (eg, posters, leaflets, business cards, newspaper ads); (ii) health professional referrals, and (iii) e-recruitment (eg, Facebook ads and web initiatives). Women interested in participating were screened by telephone for eligibility criteria and were assessed by a gynecologist to confirm their diagnosis. Once included, structured interviews were undertaken to describe their baseline characteristics. Main Outcome MeasuresThe outcomes of this study were the recruitment efficiency (the number of patients screened/enrolled), recruitment effectiveness (the number of participants enrolled), cost-effectiveness (cost per enrolled participant), and retention rate, and baseline characteristics of participants were monitored for each method. ResultsThe conventional methods (n = 101, 48%) were more effective as they allowed for greater enrollment of participants, followed by e-recruitment (n = 60, 28%) and health professional referrals (n = 33, 16%) (P < 0.007). Recruitment efficiency was found to be similar for e-recruitment and referrals (60/122 and 33/67, 49%, P = 0.055) but lower for conventional methods (101/314, 32%, P < 0.011). Nonsignificant differences were found between the three groups for baseline characteristics (P ≥ 0.189) and retention rate (91%, P ≥ 0.588). The average cost per enrolled participant was fairly similar for e-recruitment ($117) and conventional methods ($110) and lower for referrals ($60). Clinical ImplicationsOur results suggest that having a variety of recruitment methods is beneficial in promoting clinical trial recruitment without affecting participant characteristics and retention rates. Strength & LimitationsAlthough recruitment methods were used concomitantly, this study gives an excellent insight into the advantages and limitations of recruitment methods owing to a large sample size. ConclusionThe study findings revealed that e-recruitment is a valuable recruitment method because of its comparable efficiency and cost-effectiveness to health professional referrals and conventional methods, respectively. Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01455350.Benoit-Piau J, Dumoulin C, Carroll MS, et al. Efficiency and Cost: E-Recruitment Is a Promising Method in Gynecological Trials. J Sex Med 2020;17:1304–1311.