RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Researching access to health services, and ways to improve equity, frequently requires researchers to recruit people facing social disadvantage. Recruitment can be challenging, and there is limited high quality evidence to guide researchers. This paper describes experiences of recruiting 1068 participants facing social disadvantage for a randomised controlled trial of prescription charges, and provides evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of recruitment methods. METHODS: Those living in areas of higher social deprivation, taking medicines for diabetes, taking anti-psychotic medicines, or with COPD were eligible to participate in the study. Several strategies were trialled to meet recruitment targets. We initially attempted to recruit participants in person, and then switched to a phone-based system, eventually utilising a market research company to deal with incoming calls. We used a range of strategies to publicise the study, including pamphlets in pharmacies and medical centres, media (especially local newspapers) and social media. RESULTS: Enrolling people on the phone was cheaper on average than recruiting in person, but as we refined our approach over time, the cost of the latter dropped significantly. In person recruitment had many advantages, such as enhancing our understanding of potential participants' concerns. Forty-nine percent of our participants are Maori, which we attribute to having Maori researchers on the team, recruiting in areas of high Maori population, team members' existing links with Maori health providers, and engaging and working with Maori providers. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting people facing social disadvantage requires careful planning and flexible recruitment strategies. Support from organisations trusted by potential participants is essential. REGISTRATION: The Free Meds study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12618001486213 ).
