Pauline Norris1, Kimberly Cousins2, Marianna Churchward3, Shirley Keown4, Mariana Hudson5, Leina Isno2, Leilani Pereira2, Jacques Klavs6, Lucy Linqing Tang6, Hanne Roberti6, Alesha Smith6. 1. Centre for Pacific Health, Va'a o Tautai, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. pauline.norris@otago.ac.nz. 2. Centre for Pacific Health, Va'a o Tautai, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 3. Health Services Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. 4. Turanga Health, Gisborne, New Zealand. 5. Kerry Nott Pharmacy, Opotiki, New Zealand. 6. School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Researching access to health services, and ways to improve equity, frequently requires researchers to recruit people facing social disadvantage. Recruitment can be challenging, and there is limited high quality evidence to guide researchers. This paper describes experiences of recruiting 1068 participants facing social disadvantage for a randomised controlled trial of prescription charges, and provides evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of recruitment methods. METHODS: Those living in areas of higher social deprivation, taking medicines for diabetes, taking anti-psychotic medicines, or with COPD were eligible to participate in the study. Several strategies were trialled to meet recruitment targets. We initially attempted to recruit participants in person, and then switched to a phone-based system, eventually utilising a market research company to deal with incoming calls. We used a range of strategies to publicise the study, including pamphlets in pharmacies and medical centres, media (especially local newspapers) and social media. RESULTS: Enrolling people on the phone was cheaper on average than recruiting in person, but as we refined our approach over time, the cost of the latter dropped significantly. In person recruitment had many advantages, such as enhancing our understanding of potential participants' concerns. Forty-nine percent of our participants are Māori, which we attribute to having Māori researchers on the team, recruiting in areas of high Māori population, team members' existing links with Māori health providers, and engaging and working with Māori providers. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting people facing social disadvantage requires careful planning and flexible recruitment strategies. Support from organisations trusted by potential participants is essential. REGISTRATION: The Free Meds study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12618001486213 ).
BACKGROUND: Researching access to health services, and ways to improve equity, frequently requires researchers to recruit people facing social disadvantage. Recruitment can be challenging, and there is limited high quality evidence to guide researchers. This paper describes experiences of recruiting 1068 participants facing social disadvantage for a randomised controlled trial of prescription charges, and provides evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of recruitment methods. METHODS: Those living in areas of higher social deprivation, taking medicines for diabetes, taking anti-psychotic medicines, or with COPD were eligible to participate in the study. Several strategies were trialled to meet recruitment targets. We initially attempted to recruit participants in person, and then switched to a phone-based system, eventually utilising a market research company to deal with incoming calls. We used a range of strategies to publicise the study, including pamphlets in pharmacies and medical centres, media (especially local newspapers) and social media. RESULTS: Enrolling people on the phone was cheaper on average than recruiting in person, but as we refined our approach over time, the cost of the latter dropped significantly. In person recruitment had many advantages, such as enhancing our understanding of potential participants' concerns. Forty-nine percent of our participants are Māori, which we attribute to having Māori researchers on the team, recruiting in areas of high Māori population, team members' existing links with Māori health providers, and engaging and working with Māori providers. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting people facing social disadvantage requires careful planning and flexible recruitment strategies. Support from organisations trusted by potential participants is essential. REGISTRATION: The Free Meds study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12618001486213 ).
Entities:
Keywords:
Health services research; Maori; New Zealand; Prescription charges; Social disadvantage; Study recruitment
Authors: C Ni Mhurchu; T Blakely; M Funaki-Tahifote; C McKerchar; J Wilton; S Chua; Y Jiang Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Michele Heisler; Hwajung Choi; Allison B Rosen; Sandeep Vijan; Mohammed Kabeto; Kenneth M Langa; John D Piette Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Vanessa Selak; Sue Crengle; C Raina Elley; Angela Wadham; Matire Harwood; Natasha Rafter; Chris Bullen; Avinesh Pillai; Bruce Arroll; Anthony Rodgers Journal: Int J Equity Health Date: 2013-06-22
Authors: Stephen J Walters; Inês Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby; Oscar Bortolami; Laura Flight; Daniel Hind; Richard M Jacques; Christopher Knox; Ben Nadin; Joanne Rothwell; Michael Surtees; Steven A Julious Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ekaterina Volkova; Jo Michie; Callie Corrigan; Gerhard Sundborn; Helen Eyles; Yannan Jiang; Cliona Ni Mhurchu Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-07-02 Impact factor: 2.692