Efficiency and Cost: E-Recruitment Is a Promising Method in Gynecological Trials.

Background: Recruitment of participants is crucial to the success of any trial as it can have a major impact on study costs, the duration of the study itself, and, more critically, trial failure. Given that vulvodynia particularly affects young women, the use of social media and e-recruitment could prove efficient for enrollment.

Aim: To compare the efficiency, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of three different recruitment methods.

Methods: The comparison data were collected as part of a bicentric randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of physiotherapy in comparison with topical lidocaine in 212 women suffering from provoked vestibulodynia. The recruitment methods included: (i) conventional methods (eg, posters, leaflets, business cards, newspaper ads); (ii) health professional referrals, and (iii) e-recruitment (eg, Facebook ads and web initiatives). Women interested in participating were screened by telephone for eligibility criteria and were assessed by a gynecologist to confirm their diagnosis. Once included, structured interviews were undertaken to describe their baseline characteristics.

Main Outcome Measures: The outcomes of this study were the recruitment efficiency (the number of patients screened/enrolled), recruitment effectiveness (the number of participants enrolled), cost-effectiveness (cost per enrolled participant), and retention rate, and baseline characteristics of participants were monitored for each method.

Results: The conventional methods (n = 101, 48%) were more effective as they allowed for greater enrollment of participants, followed by e-recruitment (n = 60, 28%) and health professional referrals (n = 33, 16%) (P < 0.007). Recruitment efficiency was found to be similar for e-recruitment and referrals (60/122 and 33/67, 49%, P = 0.055) but lower for conventional methods (101/314, 32%, P < 0.011). Nonsignificant differences were found between the three groups for baseline characteristics (P ≥ 0.189) and retention rate (91%, P ≥ 0.588). The average cost per enrolled participant was fairly similar for e-recruitment ($117) and conventional methods ($110) and lower for referrals ($60).

Clinical Implications: Our results suggest that having a variety of recruitment methods is beneficial in promoting clinical trial recruitment without affecting participant characteristics and retention rates.

Strength & Limitations: Although recruitment methods were used concomitantly, this study gives an excellent insight into the advantages and limitations of recruitment methods owing to a large sample size.

Conclusion: The study findings revealed that e-recruitment is a valuable recruitment method because of its comparable efficiency and cost-effectiveness to health professional referrals and conventional methods, respectively.

Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01455350. Benoit-Piau J, Dumoulin C, Carroll MS, et al. Efficiency and Cost: E-Recruitment Is a Promising Method in Gynecological Trials. J Sex Med 2020;17:1304-1311.