ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2845

“Work It” Recruitment: Lessons Learned From An Arthritis Work Disability Prevention Randomized Trial

Rawan Alheresh1, Saralynn H. Allaire2, Michael P. Lavalley3, Mary Vaughan1, Rebecca Emmetts1 and Julie J. Keysor4, 1Boston University Sargent College, Boston, MA, 2Clinical Epidemiology Research, Boston Univ School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 3Biostatistics, Boston University, Boston, MA, 4Physical Therapy, Boston University Sargent College, Boston, MA

Meeting: 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: RCT, Work Disability and recruitment

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Title: Education/Community Programs

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

 

Background/Purpose: Participant recruitment is a critical component of randomized controlled trials, particularly large ones with long term outcomes like work disability. Recruitment needs to be cost-effective; but few guidelines are available to estimate recruitment costs.  The objective of this study is to evaluate the recruitment methods to date of the “Work-It Study”, a large randomized controlled trial examining the effects of a work barrier problem-solving intervention delivered by physical and occupational therapists on preventing work disability among persons with arthritis or rheumatic conditions.   

Methods: Recruitment approaches included: 1) rheumatology and medical registries (displaying brochures in practices, mailing physician letters to patients, and mailing letters to persons in a medical registry), 2) social media (Facebook, LinkedIn, and Patientslikeme) and 3) community advertising (Craigslist, flyers, newspapers, direct marketing, and other (support groups, professional associations, and arthritis foundation events)). Recruitment costs were calculated by summing printing, mailing, and personnel costs. Percentages were calculated for screened eligible, enrolled, and yield (# enrolled/#participants contacted), as available. Cost per enrolled participant in each recruitment approach was calculated. The different approaches were compared in terms of yield and cost-effectiveness. A 20-month recruitment time period was used for all approaches.   

Results: 440 people were screened, with 74% eligible; 190 were enrolled to date (58% of screened eligible; 54% of targeted sample); average cost per subject enrolled was $115 (see Table 1 for details). Letters to patients and community approaches resulted in the highest numbers of enrolled participants. Social media generated zero participants enrolled. Yield for mailings ranged from 1-5%; the medical registry had the highest yield. Costs per-participant enrolled were lowest for medical registry, physician letters, flyers, and ‘other’ approaches; displaying brochures, newspapers, and direct marketing had the highest cost per-participant enrolled. Though cost-effective, physician letters and patient registries would require large numbers of persons to be contacted to meet the desired sample size of 350 (n=8750 and n=7000 respectively). With the exception of direct marketing, community advertising approaches can generate participants but longer time periods would be needed to recruit (e.g., approximately 4 years would be needed to recruit 350 participants).  

Conclusion: Direct mailings to patients from rheumatology practices and medical registries are the most cost-effective approaches but may not be feasible given the low yield. Physician willingness to support these methods is essential. Community advertising is feasible but may take longer time periods if large sample sizes are needed.

 

Table 1: Yield and cost of rheumatology, medical database registry,  and community advertising recruitment methods in the Work-It Study.

 

Rheumatology offices and medical databases

Community advertising

Total

Brochure displayed in rheum practices

Letters sent to patients from rheum MDs

Medical registry

News

papers

Flyers

Craigslist

Direct Market

Other

Participants contacted

—

650

108

—

—

—

1975

—

—

Screened

(% screened eligible)

20

(60%)

38

(74%)

12

(67%)

128

(70%)

43

(58%)

112

(75%)

41

(78%)

57

(75%)

440

(74%)

Enrolled

(% from screened eligible)

9

(75%)

25

(89%)

6

(75%)

50

(56%)

13

(52%)

40

(48%)

20

(63%)

27

(63%)

190

(58%)

Yield

—

4%

5%

—

—

—

1%

—

—

Cost per enrolled

$300a

$71b

$17c

$185 d

$91 e

$53 f

$177 g

$28 h

$115

Total costs

$2696 a

$1780b

$100 c

$9258 d

$1181 e

$2125 f

$3533 g

$762 h

$21,435

a Payment to rheumatology practice, printing, brochures

b Payment to rheumatologists, printing, brochures, supplies, stamps

c Registry fees

d Advertising fees

e Staff time, printing

f Posting fees

g Direct marketing fees, printing, supplies, stamps

h Printing

 


Disclosure:

R. Alheresh,
None;

S. H. Allaire,
None;

M. P. Lavalley,
None;

M. Vaughan,
None;

R. Emmetts,
None;

J. J. Keysor,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/work-it-recruitment-lessons-learned-from-an-arthritis-work-disability-prevention-randomized-trial/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology