Original ArticleSurvey among 78 studies showed that Lasagna's law holds in Dutch primary care research
Introduction
Research in primary care is essential to inform evidence based health care decisions of general practitioners (GPs) and allied workers [1]. Research activity in general practice has considerably increased over the past few decades [2].
Independent of setting, the recruitment of patients for a study often takes much more time than investigators have estimated. Many years ago, this phenomenon was coined “Lasagna's Law”, after the American clinical pharmacologist Louis Lasagna, who observed that when trial recruitment starts, the supply of suitable patients becomes a fraction of what it was assumed to be before the trial began [3].
Some articles have addressed this problem, but these were mostly case reports of single studies, which hampers generalization [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Foy et al. reported that very few recommended recruitment strategies for randomized trials in primary care are evidence based [9]. A systematic review of recruitment problems identified 78 randomized trials (1986–1996), only three of which were performed in general practice [10]. We performed a literature review and found only limited evidence for the impact of study characteristics and interventions on the success of patient recruitment. A Cochrane review concluded that it is difficult to generalize the effects of specific interventions from individual trials [11].
We aimed to assess factors that are related to success and failure of recruitment in general practice research, by systematically assessing potentially relevant factors in a large number of patient-related studies in Dutch general practice.
Section snippets
Projects
Through project leaders at the eight departments of general practice in the Netherlands; the Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), and the Centre for Quality of Care Research, we made an inventory of all projects that fulfilled the following criteria:
- •
Actual involvement of patients, either as subjects of an intervention study or as respondents to questionnaires;
- •
General practice played an essential role in patient recruitment;
- •
Patient recruitment completed between 1 January
Results
In the telephone inventory, 125 projects were identified as potentially eligible. Eighty-five of these were selected for an interview, and 78 of these interviews (92%) were completed. Reasons for not completing interviews were that these projects had erroneously been included, or that the person who could provide information was not available.
Discussion
This survey of 78 studies shows considerable variation in recruitment rates, at GP level as well as at patient level. Although a median of 87% of planned patients eventually being recruited may be interpreted positively, a considerable number of projects needed much more time than planned to obtain a sufficient number of patients. Almost 40% of projects had to extend the fieldwork period by at least 50%.
We studied several outcome measures as parameters of recruitment success. The study
Acknowledgments
Our thanks go to all our informants for their frank and elaborate information regarding the studies they were involved in, and to Valentien Blom for assistance in data entry.
ZonMW, the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, project number 4200.0005, funded the study.
References (17)
- et al.
Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review
J Clin Epidemiol
(1999) - Mant D. R&D in primary care. National Working Group Report. UK: Department of Health, 1997. (Report No. 97CC0138.)...
- et al.
What is the future of primary care? Probably fairly bright, if we may believe the historical development
Scand J Prim Health Care
(2005) Initial preparation for clinical trials
- et al.
Randomised clinical trials in general practice: lessons from a failure
BMJ
(1991) - et al.
Factors affecting general practitioners' recruitment of patients into a prospective study
Fam Pract
(1993) - Tasche MJA. Practical aspects of a randomized controlled trial in general practice; patient recruitment, inclusion and...
- et al.
Practical aspects of conducting a randomised trial
Br J Gen Pract
(2000)
Cited by (95)
Development and evaluation of objective trial performance metrics for multisite clinical studies: Experience from the AlcHep Network
2024, Contemporary Clinical TrialsIntrinsic motivation of GPs was not related to recruitment success, whereas interest in the study topic was
2020, Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyThe Effect of a Personalized Newsletter to Physical Therapists on Patient Recruitment: A Cluster Randomized Trial in Primary Physiotherapy Care
2020, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsCitation Excerpt :Moreover, there are no known effective strategies to increase patient recruitment aimed at the recruiters, such as GPs and PTs.11,23 However, compliance of GPs regarding patient recruitment was positively affected by personal contact between researchers and health care providers and utilization of pre-existing patient contacts.5,6,24 Unfortunately, personal contact is time-consuming and costly.
Progress of the ALIFE2 study: A dynamic road towards more evidence
2020, Thrombosis ResearchRecruitment through media and general practitioners resulted in comparable samples in an RCT on incontinence
2020, Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyPrimary care involvement in clinical research – prerequisites, motivators, and barriers: results from a study series
2024, Archives of Public Health