Back to Search
Start Over
Converting from face-to-face to postal follow-up and its effects on participant retention, response rates and errors:lessons from the EQUAL study in the UK
- Source :
- Gates, E R, Hole, B, Hayward, S J L, Chesnaye, N C, Meuleman, Y, Dekker, F, Evans, M, Heimburger, O, Torino, C, Porto, G, Szymczak, M, Drechsler, C, Wanner, C, Jager, K, Roderick, P & Caskey, F J 2022, ' Converting from face-to-face to postal follow-up and its effects on participant retention, response rates and errors : lessons from the EQUAL study in the UK ', BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 22, no. 1, 44 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01453-0, BMC medical research methodology, 22(1):44. BioMed Central, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22(1). BMC, BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol 22, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2022)
- Publication Year :
- 2022
-
Abstract
- Background Prospective cohort studies are challenging to deliver, with one of the main difficulties lying in retention of participants. The need to socially distance during the COVID-19 pandemic has added to this challenge. The pre-COVID-19 adaptation of the European Quality (EQUAL) study in the UK to a remote form of follow-up for efficiency provides lessons for those who are considering changing their study design. Methods The EQUAL study is an international prospective cohort study of patients ≥65 years of age with advanced chronic kidney disease. Initially, patients were invited to complete a questionnaire (SF-36, Dialysis Symptom Index and Renal Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire) at research clinics every 3–6 months, known as “traditional follow-up” (TFU). In 2018, all living patients were invited to switch to “efficient follow-up” (EFU), which used an abbreviated questionnaire consisting of SF-12 and Dialysis Symptom Index. These were administered centrally by post. Response rates were calculated using returned questionnaires as a proportion of surviving invitees, and error rates presented as the average percentage of unanswered questions or unclear answers, of total questions in returned questionnaires. Response and error rates were calculated 6-monthly in TFU to allow comparisons with EFU. Results Of the 504 patients initially recruited, 236 were still alive at the time of conversion to EFU; 111 of these (47%) consented to the change in follow-up. In those who consented, median TFU was 34 months, ranging from 0 to 42 months. Their response rates fell steadily from 88% (98/111) at month 0 of TFU, to 20% (3/15) at month 42. The response rate for the first EFU questionnaire was 60% (59/99) of those alive from TFU. With this improvement in response rates, the first EFU also lowered errors to baseline levels seen in early follow-up, after having almost trebled throughout traditional follow-up. Conclusions Overall, this study demonstrates that administration of shorter follow-up questionnaires by post rather than in person does not negatively impact patient response or error rates. These results may be reassuring for researchers who are trying to limit face-to-face contact with patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Subjects :
- Medicine (General)
retention
Epidemiology
Errors
Health Informatics
Face-to-face
R5-920
response rates
Chronic kidney disease
follow-up
Humans
errors
Prospective Studies
Pandemics
prospective cohort study
SARS-CoV-2
Follow-up
COVID-19
Response rates
United Kingdom
Prospective cohort study
Retention
Optometry
Psychology
chronic kidney disease
Follow-Up Studies
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 14712288
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Gates, E R, Hole, B, Hayward, S J L, Chesnaye, N C, Meuleman, Y, Dekker, F, Evans, M, Heimburger, O, Torino, C, Porto, G, Szymczak, M, Drechsler, C, Wanner, C, Jager, K, Roderick, P & Caskey, F J 2022, ' Converting from face-to-face to postal follow-up and its effects on participant retention, response rates and errors : lessons from the EQUAL study in the UK ', BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 22, no. 1, 44 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01453-0, BMC medical research methodology, 22(1):44. BioMed Central, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22(1). BMC, BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol 22, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2022)
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....144afbb63da0a37b6eb5ff9478b413c6