» Articles » PMID: 36717432

Telephone Outreach Enhances Recruitment of Underrepresented Seriously Ill Patients for an Advance Care Planning Pragmatic Trial

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2023 Jan 30
PMID 36717432
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Patients experiencing systemic patterns of disadvantage, such as racial/ethnic minorities and those with limited English proficiency, are underrepresented in research. This is particularly true for large pragmatic trials of potentially sensitive research topics, such as advance care planning (ACP). It is unclear how phone outreach may affect research participation by underrepresented individuals.

Objective: To assess the effect of phone outreach, in addition to standard mail survey recruitment, in a population-based ACP pragmatic trial at three academic health systems in California.

Design: Retrospective cohort study PATIENTS: Primary care patients with serious illness were mailed a survey in their preferred language. Patients who did not initially respond by mail received up to three reminder phone calls with the option of survey completion by phone.

Main Measures: Effect of phone outreach on survey response rate associated with respondent demographic characteristics (e.g., Social Vulnerability Index [SVI], range 0 (low) to 1 (high)).

Results: Across the health systems, 5998 seriously ill patients were mailed surveys. We obtained completed surveys from 1215 patients (20% response rate); 787 (65%) responded after mail alone and 428 (35%) participated only after phone outreach. Patients recruited after phone outreach compared to mail alone were more socially vulnerable (SVI 0.41 v 0.35, P < 0.001), were more likely to report being a racial/ethnic minority (35% v 28%, P = 0.006), and non-English speaking (16% v 10%, P = 0.005). Age and gender did not differ significantly. The inclusion of phone outreach resulted in a sample that better represented the baseline population than mail alone in racial/ethnic minority (28% mail alone, 30% including phone outreach, 36% baseline population), non-English language preference (10%, 12%, 15%, respectively), and SVI (0.35, 0.37, 0.38, respectively).

Conclusions: Phone outreach for a population-based survey in a pragmatic trial concerning a potentially sensitive topic significantly enhanced recruitment of underrepresented seriously ill patients.

Citing Articles

Email recruitment for chronic pain clinical trials: results from the LAMP trial.

Ferguson J, Hagel Campbell E, Bangerter A, Cross L, Allen K, Behrens K Trials. 2024; 25(1):491.

PMID: 39030622 PMC: 11264665. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08301-8.


Assessing Representativeness of Seriously Ill Patient Survey Responders in a Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

Chau A, Hays R, Walling A, Gibbs L, Rahimi M, Sudore R Ethn Dis. 2024; 33(2-3):91-97.

PMID: 38845734 PMC: 11145732. DOI: 10.18865/ed.33.2-3.091.


Participation in Advance Care Planning Among Medically At-Risk Rural Veterans: Protocol for a Personalized Engagement Model.

Walkner T, Karr D, Murray S, Heeren A, Berry-Stoelzle M JMIR Res Protoc. 2024; 13:e55080.

PMID: 38608267 PMC: 11053389. DOI: 10.2196/55080.


Support for Use of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Communication Items Among Seriously Ill Patients.

Hays R, Walling A, Sudore R, Chau A, Wenger N J Palliat Med. 2023; 26(9):1234-1239.

PMID: 37093298 PMC: 10623076. DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2022.0572.

References
1.
Bonevski B, Randell M, Paul C, Chapman K, Twyman L, Bryant J . Reaching the hard-to-reach: a systematic review of strategies for improving health and medical research with socially disadvantaged groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014; 14:42. PMC: 3974746. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-42. View

2.
Grabovschi C, Loignon C, Fortin M . Mapping the concept of vulnerability related to health care disparities: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013; 13:94. PMC: 3626765. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-94. View

3.
McDonald A, Knight R, Campbell M, Entwistle V, Grant A, Cook J . What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2006; 7:9. PMC: 1475627. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-7-9. View

4.
Wong A, Kirby J, Guyatt G, Moayyedi P, Vora P, You J . Randomized controlled trial comparing telephone and mail follow-up for recruitment of participants into a clinical trial of colorectal cancer screening. Trials. 2013; 14:40. PMC: 3599938. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-40. View

5.
Alcaraz K, Vereen R, Burnham D . Use of Telephone and Digital Channels to Engage Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Adults in Health Disparities Research Within a Social Service Setting: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(4):e16680. PMC: 7160701. DOI: 10.2196/16680. View