OBJECTIVES: The timely recruitment of study participants is a critical component of successful trials. Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), a common nonmalignant urologic condition among older men, is characterized by lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Successful recruitment methods for a trial of medical therapy for BPH, Medical Therapy of Prostate Symptoms (MTOPS), were mass mailing and advertising. The Complementary and Alternative Medicines Trial for Urological Symptoms (CAMUS) was designed to evaluate a botanical therapy, saw palmetto, for the treatment of BPH. The objective of this study was to evaluate recruitment strategies for CAMUS and to contrast the baseline characteristics of CAMUS participants with those recruited to a similar trial using conventional medical therapy. DESIGN: CAMUS is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of saw palmetto given at escalating doses over an 18-month period on relief from LUTS. SUBJECTS: The target enrollment goal was 350 men with LUTS from 11 clinical centers over a 12-month period. The recruitment techniques used and participants contacted, screened, and randomized through each technique were obtained from the clinical centers. Baseline characteristics of the CAMUS participants were compared with participants in the MTOPS trial who met the CAMUS eligibility criteria for LUTS. RESULTS: The target enrollment goal was achieved in 11 months. The overall monthly recruitment rate per site was 3.7 and ranged from 2.4 to 8.0. The most successful recruitment methods were mass mailing and advertising, which accounted for 39% and 35% of the study participants, respectively. In comparison to MTOPS participants, CAMUS participants were younger, more highly educated, more diverse, and had less severe urinary symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Successful recruitment methods for CAMUS were similar to those in MTOPS. The use of botanical therapy attracted a less symptomatic and more educated study population.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The timely recruitment of study participants is a critical component of successful trials. Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), a common nonmalignant urologic condition among older men, is characterized by lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Successful recruitment methods for a trial of medical therapy for BPH, Medical Therapy of Prostate Symptoms (MTOPS), were mass mailing and advertising. The Complementary and Alternative Medicines Trial for Urological Symptoms (CAMUS) was designed to evaluate a botanical therapy, saw palmetto, for the treatment of BPH. The objective of this study was to evaluate recruitment strategies for CAMUS and to contrast the baseline characteristics of CAMUS participants with those recruited to a similar trial using conventional medical therapy. DESIGN: CAMUS is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of saw palmetto given at escalating doses over an 18-month period on relief from LUTS. SUBJECTS: The target enrollment goal was 350 men with LUTS from 11 clinical centers over a 12-month period. The recruitment techniques used and participants contacted, screened, and randomized through each technique were obtained from the clinical centers. Baseline characteristics of the CAMUS participants were compared with participants in the MTOPS trial who met the CAMUS eligibility criteria for LUTS. RESULTS: The target enrollment goal was achieved in 11 months. The overall monthly recruitment rate per site was 3.7 and ranged from 2.4 to 8.0. The most successful recruitment methods were mass mailing and advertising, which accounted for 39% and 35% of the study participants, respectively. In comparison to MTOPS participants, CAMUS participants were younger, more highly educated, more diverse, and had less severe urinary symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Successful recruitment methods for CAMUS were similar to those in MTOPS. The use of botanical therapy attracted a less symptomatic and more educated study population.
Authors: Judith Parsells Kelly; David W Kaufman; Katherine Kelley; Lynn Rosenberg; Allen A Mitchell Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Paula Gardiner; Robert Graham; Anna T R Legedza; Andrew C Ahn; David M Eisenberg; Russell S Phillips Journal: Altern Ther Health Med Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.305
Authors: Michael A Diefenbach; Natalie Hamrick; Robert Uzzo; Alan Pollack; Eric Horwitz; Richard Greenberg; Paul F Engstrom Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Aditya Bardia; Nicole L Nisly; M Bridget Zimmerman; Brian M Gryzlak; Robert B Wallace Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Stephen Bent; Christopher Kane; Katsuto Shinohara; John Neuhaus; Esther S Hudes; Harley Goldberg; Andrew L Avins Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-02-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael J Barry; Sreelatha Meleth; Jeannette Y Lee; Karl J Kreder; Andrew L Avins; J Curtis Nickel; Claus G Roehrborn; E David Crawford; Harris E Foster; Steven A Kaplan; Andrew McCullough; Gerald L Andriole; Michael J Naslund; O Dale Williams; John W Kusek; Catherine M Meyers; Joseph M Betz; Alan Cantor; Kevin T McVary Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Minal J Bhanushali; Tarah Gustafson; Steve Powell; Robin A Conwit; Jerry S Wolinsky; Gary R Cutter; Fred D Lublin; Stacey S Cofield Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 2.486