Cope Tyler L, George Steven Z, Hastings S Nicole, France Courtni, Tumminello Christa, Coffman Cynthia J, Choate Ashley, Lentz Trevor A
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2025 Apr 11;45:101483. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101483. eCollection 2025 Jun.
Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) assess interventions in real-world settings. Best practices for recruiting clinical sites for ePCTs are unknown, especially for sites that aren't known to the study team or familiar with clinical research. We describe the site recruitment process for AIM-Back, an ePCT of two nonpharmacologic pathways for low back pain within the Veterans Health Administration (VA).
During the planning phase of the AIM-Back trial, we aimed to recruit 18-20 sites. Eligible sites required provider capacity, administrative support, and geographic separation to avoid contamination. Our three-step approach involved: (1) lead (VA personnel) identification through existing VA contacts, data repositories of VA clinicians, and promotional outreach at events and listservs; (2) lead engagement via tailored communications emphasizing participation benefits; and (3) virtual meetings with administrators and clinicians.
We identified 184 leads across 53 VA healthcare systems. Leads from 40 systems responded to outreach, and recruitment meetings were conducted with 23 systems involving primary care, physical therapy, research staff, and leadership. We met our recruitment goal, securing participation agreements from 19 sites, with a median timeline from outreach to participation agreement of 3.7 months. Common reasons for non-participation included infrastructure and resource constraints, resistance to new clinical programs, and competing programs.
AIM-Back's recruitment highlights ePCT site recruitment complexities for trials engaging new clinical research sites. Our innovative three-step recruitment approach provides an example for similarly designed trials. Future ePCTs should consider comprehensive recruitment strategies to ensure clinician buy-in, study feasibility, and broaden existing networks for completing ePCTs.
嵌入式务实临床试验(ePCTs)在现实环境中评估干预措施。招募ePCTs临床站点的最佳实践尚不清楚,尤其是对于研究团队不了解或不熟悉临床研究的站点。我们描述了AIM-Back的站点招募过程,AIM-Back是退伍军人健康管理局(VA)内一项针对两种非药物性腰痛治疗途径的ePCT。
在AIM-Back试验的规划阶段,我们旨在招募18 - 20个站点。符合条件的站点需要具备医疗服务能力、行政支持以及地理上的分隔以避免干扰。我们的三步方法包括:(1)通过现有的VA联系人、VA临床医生的数据存储库以及在活动和邮件列表上的推广宣传来识别潜在站点负责人(VA人员);(2)通过强调参与益处的定制化沟通来与潜在站点负责人建立联系;(3)与行政人员和临床医生进行虚拟会议。
我们在53个VA医疗系统中识别出184个潜在站点负责人。来自40个系统的潜在站点负责人对宣传做出了回应,并且与23个系统进行了招募会议,涉及初级保健、物理治疗、研究人员和领导层。我们实现了招募目标,从19个站点获得了参与协议,从宣传到参与协议的中位时间为3.7个月。不参与的常见原因包括基础设施和资源限制、对新临床项目的抵触以及竞争项目。
AIM-Back的招募凸显了ePCT在吸引新临床研究站点参与试验时的招募复杂性。我们创新的三步招募方法为类似设计的试验提供了一个范例。未来的ePCT应考虑全面的招募策略,以确保临床医生的认可、研究的可行性,并扩大完成ePCT的现有网络。