Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Precision Population Science Lab, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
J Prim Care Community Health. 2023 Jan-Dec;14:21501319231194967. doi: 10.1177/21501319231194967.
Using a digital process that leverages electronic health records (EHRs) can ease many of the challenges presented by the traditional enrollment process for clinical trials. We tested if automated batch enrollment using a technology-enabled subject recruitment system (TESRS) enhances recruitment while preserving representation of research subjects for the study population in our study setting.
An ongoing community-based prospective adult cohort study was used to randomize 600 subjects who were eligible by age and residential address to TESRS (n = 300) and standard mailing method (n = 300), respectively, for 3 months. Then, TESRS was initiated and included automatic identification of patients' preference for being contacted (online patient portal vs postal mail) from EHRs and automatic sending out of invitation letters followed by completion of a short online survey for checking eligibility and the digital consent process if eligible. We compared (1) median time to consent from invitation sent out per subject and total subjects recruited after a 3-month recruitment period, (2) the estimated study staff's time, and (3) representation of sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex, race, SES measured by HOUSES index, and rural residence) between subjects recruited via TESRS and those via traditional mailing methods.
Median age of randomized subjects (n = 600) was 63 years with 52.0% female and 89.2% non-Hispanic White. Over a 3-month period, results showed consent rate via TESRS was 13% (39/297) similar to 11% (31/295) via standard mailing. However, recruitment was significantly faster with the TESRS approach (median 7 vs 26 days) given the study staff's effort. Study staff's time saved by using TESRS compared to standard mailing approach was estimated at 40 min per subject (equivalent to 200 h for 300 subjects). No significant differences in characteristics of research subjects from the study population were found.
Our study demonstrated the utility of TESRS as a subject recruitment digital technology which significantly enhanced the recruitment effort while reducing the study staff burden of recruitment while maintaining the consistency of characteristics of recruited subjects. The strategy and support for implementing and testing TESRS in other study settings should be considered.
利用电子健康记录(EHR)的数字流程可以减轻临床试验传统入组流程带来的许多挑战。我们通过一项技术驱动的受试者招募系统(TESRS)来测试自动化批量入组是否可以提高入组率,同时保持研究人群的代表性。
一项正在进行的社区为基础的成年队列前瞻性研究,将年龄和住址符合条件的 600 名受试者随机分配至 TESRS(n=300)和标准邮寄方法(n=300)组,分别进行 3 个月的入组。然后启动 TESRS,从 EHR 中自动识别患者的联系方式偏好(在线患者门户与邮寄),并自动发送邀请信,随后完成简短的在线调查,以检查入组资格和数字同意流程(如果符合条件)。我们比较了(1)每位受试者从邀请信发出到同意的中位数时间,以及 3 个月入组期后的总入组人数;(2)估计的研究人员的时间;(3)通过 TESRS 和传统邮寄方法招募的受试者的社会人口特征(如年龄、性别、种族、HOUSES 指数衡量的 SES 和农村居住)的代表性。
随机入组的受试者(n=600)的中位年龄为 63 岁,52.0%为女性,89.2%为非西班牙裔白人。在 3 个月的时间内,通过 TESRS 的同意率为 13%(39/297),与标准邮寄方法的 11%(31/295)相似。然而,考虑到研究人员的努力,通过 TESRS 招募的速度明显更快(中位数为 7 天 vs 26 天)。与标准邮寄方法相比,使用 TESRS 可节省研究人员 40 分钟/受试者(相当于 300 名受试者 200 小时)的时间。研究人群中的受试者特征与研究人群无显著差异。
我们的研究表明,TESRS 作为一种受试者招募数字技术具有实用性,它可以显著提高入组效率,同时减轻研究人员的招募负担,同时保持招募受试者的特征一致性。应考虑在其他研究环境中实施和测试 TESRS 的策略和支持。