Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T13:32:52.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Recruiting opiate users to a randomized controlled trial in primary care: a descriptive study of GP attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2006

Laura Sheard
Affiliation:
Leeds North East Primary Care Trust, Leeds, UK
Charlotte NE Tompkins
Affiliation:
Leeds North East Primary Care Trust, Leeds, UK
Nat MJ Wright
Affiliation:
Leeds Community Drug Treatment Services, Centre for Research in Primary Care, Leeds, UK
Clive E Adams
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Historically, few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in primary care and problems have been experienced applying this methodology in these settings. In 2001, The Leeds Evaluation of Efficacy of Detoxification Study (LEEDS) was developed. This RCT aimed to compare two detoxification drugs to inform best practice for the treatment of opiate users presenting to primary care requesting detoxification. This paper presents descriptive data from a postal survey of 12 general practitioners (GPs) from 10 primary care practices who were involved in the LEEDS trial. The questionnaire was sent out in November 2004, used open and closed questions and was self-administered. It uncovered factors that affected patient recruitment, GPs' views on the trial and their experience of randomizing opiate using patients. Flexible solutions to overcoming recruitment difficulties are presented alongside idealistic solutions to the problems experienced. The implications of our experiences of conducting this RCT in primary care practices are discussed in the light of conducting RCTs in primary care settings. This will benefit other research teams and clinicians who may be planning to use a similar research methodology.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2006 Arnold