Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur Spine J. 2010 May;19(5):747-53. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1337-6. Epub 2010 Mar 1.
Trials often do not succeed in including as many patients as anticipated beforehand. The aim of this paper was to describe why we were not able to include more than a few patients in our randomized controlled treatment trial on the effectiveness of bracing patients with idiopathic scoliosis, and to describe which lessons can be learnt. A pilot study on the willingness to participate in such a trial was conducted amongst 21 patients and their parents. A description of how we prepared and designed this trial, the problems we faced and how we tried to improve the inclusion are given. A total of four patients were included, and 14 refused to participate in an 18-month period. There were a lot less eligible patients than anticipated (40 instead of 100 per year), and the patients' participation rate was much lower than we had found in our pilot study (21% instead of 70%). The trial failed to include more than a few patients because of an overestimation of the number of eligible patients and because a lot less eligible patients were willing to participate compared to our pilot study. One reason for a low participation rate could be that this trial evaluated a frequently used existing treatment instead of a new treatment, and patients and parents might be afraid of not being treated (despite an intensive secure system for the control arm).
试验常常无法成功纳入预期数量的患者。本文旨在描述我们为何无法在针对特发性脊柱侧凸患者支具治疗效果的随机对照治疗试验中纳入更多患者,并描述从中可以汲取的经验教训。我们对 21 名患者及其家长进行了一项关于参与此类试验意愿的预试验。本文描述了我们如何准备和设计这项试验、我们面临的问题以及我们如何尝试改进纳入的情况。总共纳入了 4 名患者,在 18 个月的时间内,有 14 名患者拒绝参与。符合条件的患者数量比预期的少得多(每年 40 名而非 100 名),而且患者的参与率远低于我们在预试验中发现的水平(21%而非 70%)。该试验未能纳入更多患者,原因是对符合条件的患者数量估计过高,以及与预试验相比,愿意参与的符合条件的患者数量明显减少。参与率低的一个原因可能是,该试验评估的是一种常用的现有治疗方法,而不是新的治疗方法,患者和家长可能担心得不到治疗(尽管为对照组提供了强化的安全保障)。