Predictors of Missed Research Appointments in a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Document Type: RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

Massachusetts General Hospital

Abstract

Background:
 The primary aim of this study was to determine predictors of missed research appointments in a prospective  andomized placebo injection-controlled trial with evaluations 1 to 3 and 5 to 8 months after enrollment.  
Methods:
 This study represents a secondary use of data from 104 patients that were enrolled in a prospective randomized  ontrolled trial of dexamethasone versus lidocaine (placebo) injection for various diagnoses. Patients were enrolled between June 2003 and February 2008. Sixty-three patients (61%) had lateral epicondylosis, 17 patients (16%) had trapeziometacarpal arthrosis, and 24 patients (23%) had de Quervain syndrome. Each patient completed a set of questionnaires at time of enrollment. Bivariable and multivariable analyses were used to determine factors associated with missed research appointments.
 Results:
 Fourteen patients (13%) did not return for the first follow-up and 33 patients (32%) did not return for the second follow-up. The best multivariable logistic regression model for missing the first research visit explained 35% of the variability and included younger age, belief that health can be controlled, and no college education. The best model for missing the second research visit explained 17% of the variability and included greater pain intensity, less personal responsibility for health, and diagnosis (trapeziometacarpal arthrosis and de Quervain syndrome).
Conclusions:
 Younger patients with no college education, who believe their health can be controlled, are more likely to miss a research appointment when enrolled in a randomized placebo injection-controlled trial. 

Keywords


Bryant DM, Willits K, Hanson BP. Principles of designing a cohort study in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:10-4.

  • Orr PR, Blackhurst DW, Hawkins BS. Patient and clinic factors predictive of missed visits and inactive status in a multicenter clinical trial. The Macular Photocoagulation Study Group. Control Clin Trials. 1992; 13:40-9.

  • Smith JS, Watts HG. Methods for locating missing patients for the purpose of long-term clinical studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80:431-8.

  • Sprague S, Leece P, Bhandari M, Tornetta P 3rd, Schemitsch E, Swiontkowski MF, et al. Limiting loss to follow-up in a multicenter randomized trial in orthopedic surgery. Control Clin Trials. 2003; 24:719-25.

  • Murray DW, Britton AR, Bulstrode CJ. Loss to follow-up matters. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997; 79:254-7.

  • Wildner M. Lost to follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77:657.

  • Schonfeld T, Anderson J. Dropout by design: advance planning for research participant noncompliance. Am J Bioeth. 2011; 11:18-20.

  • Lindenhovius A, Henket M, Gilligan BP, Lozano-Calderon S, Jupiter JB, Ring D. Injection of dexamethasone versus placebo for lateral elbow pain: a prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial. J Hand Surg Am. 2008; 33:909-19.

  • Makarawung DJ, Becker SJ, Bekkers S, Ring D. Disability and pain after cortisone versus placebo injection for trapeziometacarpal arthrosis and de Quervain syndrome. Hand (N Y). 2013; 8:375-81.

  • Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med. 1996; 29:602-8.

  • Wallston KA, Wallston BS, DeVellis R. Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control (MHLC) Scales. Health Educ Monogr. 1978; 6:160-70.

  • Eysenck HJ, Eysenck SBG. Manual for the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R Adult). San Diego: Educational Industrial Testing Service; 1994.

  • Radloff LS. ‘The CES-D scale: A self report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977; 1:385-401.

  • Weissman MM, Sholomskas D, Pottenger M, Prusoff BA, Locke BZ. Assessing depressive symptoms in five psychiatric populations: a validation study. Am J Epidemiol. 1977; 106:203-14.

  • Sullivan MJL, Bishop SR, Pivik J. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and Validation. Psychol Assess. 1995; 7:524-32.

  • Grindley EJ, Zizzi SJ, Nasypany AM. Use of protection motivation theory, affect, and barriers to understand and predict adherence to outpatient rehabilitation. Phys Ther. 2008; 88:1529-40.

  • Klenerman L, Slade PD, Stanley IM, Pennie B, Reilly JP, Atchison LE, et al. The prediction of chronicity in patients with an acute attack of low back pain in a general practice setting. Spine. 1995; 20:478-84.

  • Murnaghan ML, Buckley RE. Lost but not forgotten: patients lost to follow-up in a trauma database. Can J Surg. 2002; 45:191-5.

  • Tejwani NC, Takemoto RC, Nayak G, Pahk B, Egol KA. Who is lost to followup?: a study of patients with distal radius fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468:599-604.

  • Chung SM, Scholl HW Jr, Ralston EL, Pendergrass EP. The colonna capsular arthroplasty. A long-term follow-up study of fifty-six patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971; 53:1511-27.

  • Kemmler G, Hummer M, Widschwendter C, Fleischhacker WW. Dropout rates in placebo-controlled and active-control clinical trials of antipsychotic drugs: a meta-analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005; 62:1305-12.

  • Bell RL, Curb JD, Friedman LM, McIntyre KM, Payton-Ross C. Enhancement of visit adherence in the national beta-blocker heart attack trial. Control Clin Trials. 1985; 6:89-101.