Recruiting Rural Participants for a Telehealth Intervention on Diabetes Self-Management
Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing at University of California Davis, Sacramento, California Clinical and Translational Science Center at University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.The Journal of Rural Health (Impact Factor: 1.45). 12/2013; 29(1):69-77. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2012.00443.x
Purpose: Recruiting rural and underserved participants in behavioral health interventions is challenging. Community-based recruitment approaches are effective, but they are not always feasible in multisite, diverse community interventions. This study evaluates the feasibility of a rapid, multisite approach that uses rural clinic site coordinators to recruit study participants. The approach allows for rural recruitment in areas where researchers may not have developed long-term collaborative relationships. Methods: Adults with diabetes were recruited from rural Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) clinics. Recruitment feasibility was assessed by analyzing field notes by the project manager and health coaches, and 8 in-depth, semistructured interviews with clinic site coordinators and champions, followed by thematic analysis of field notes and interviews. Findings: Forty-seven rural sites were contacted to obtain the 6 sites that participated in the study. On average, sites took 14 days to commit to study participation. One hundred and twenty-one participants were acquired from letters mailed to eligible participants and, in some sites, by follow-up phone calls from site coordinators. Facilitators and deterrents affecting study recruitment fell into 4 broad categories-study design, site, site coordinator, and participant factors. Conclusion: The rapid multisite approach led to quick and efficient recruitment of clinic sites and participants. Recruitment success was achieved in some, but not all, rural sites. The study highlights the opportunities and challenges of recruiting rural clinics and rural, underserved participants in multisite research. Suggestions are provided for improving recruitment for future interventions.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Diabetes educators and self-management programs are scarce in rural communities, where diabetes is the third highest-ranking health concern. The goal of this study was to evaluate the benefits of nurse telehealth coaching for persons with diabetes living in rural communities through a person-centered approach using motivational interviewing (MI) techniques. Materials and methods: A randomized experimental study design was used to assign participants to receive either nurse telehealth coaching for five sessions (intervention group) or usual care (control group). Outcomes were measured in both groups using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale (DES), SF-12, and satisfaction surveys. Mean scores for each outcome were compared at baseline and at the 9-month follow-up for both groups using a Student's t test. We also evaluated the change from baseline by estimating the difference in differences (pre- and postintervention) using regression methods. Results: Among the 101 participants included in the analysis, 51 received nurse telehealth coaching, and 50 received usual care. We found significantly higher self-efficacy scores in the intervention group compared with the control group based on the DES at 9 months (4.03 versus 3.64, respectively; p<0.05) and the difference in difference estimation (0.42; p<0.05). Conclusions: The nurse MI/telehealth coaching model used in this study shows promise as an effective intervention for diabetes self-management in rural communities. The sustained effect on outcomes observed in the intervention group suggests that this model could be a feasible intervention for long-term behavioral change among persons living with chronic disease in rural communities.Telemedicine and e-Health 07/2014; 20(9). DOI:10.1089/tmj.2013.0326 · 1.67 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.