International Journal of Epidemiology 2003;32:634-636
© International Epidemiological Association 2003
A randomized trial of opinion leader endorsement in a survey of orthopaedic surgeons: effect on primary response rates
1 Departments of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
2 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
3 St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Correspondence: Mohit Bhandari, McMaster University Health Sciences Center, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Room 2C3, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada. E-mail: bhandari{at}sympatico.ca
Background Opinion leaders have been shown to have significant influence on the practice of health professionals and patient outcomes.
Methods Using focus groups, key informants, and sampling to redundancy techniques, we developed a questionnaire of surgeons’ preferences in the treatment of tibial shaft fractures. Twenty-two well-respected and widely known orthopaedic traumatologists endorsed the questionnaire. We randomized 395 surgeon members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association to receive either a questionnaire that included a letter informing them of the opinion leaders’ endorsement, or a questionnaire without the endorsement.
Results Surgeons who received the letter of endorsement had a significantly lower response rate at 2, 4, and 8 weeks. The absolute difference in response rates was 7.8% (4.6% versus 12.4%, P < 0.05) at 2 weeks, 13.1% at 4 weeks (28.6% versus 41.7% P < 0.02), and 12.3% at 8 weeks (47.5% versus 59.8% P = 0.02).
Conclusions The addition of a letter listing expert surgeons who endorse the survey lead to significantly lower primary response rates. Those interested in influencing physician responses cannot always assume a positive effect from endorsement by opinion leaders
Keywords Survey, orthopaedic surgery, response rates, opinion leader, fracture
Accepted 10 February 2002
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Sprague, L. Quigley, and M. Bhandari Survey Design in Orthopaedic Surgery: Getting Surgeons to Respond J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2009; 91(Supplement_3): 27 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. C. Wright, A. R. Gagliardi, C. H. L. Law, L. D. Last, A. E. Klevan, S. Hongjinda, L. W. Stitt, N. Klar, D. P. Ryan, and A. J. Smith A Randomized Controlled Trial to Improve Lymph Node Assessment in Stage II Colon Cancer Arch Surg, November 1, 2008; 143(11): 1050 - 1055. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. B. VanGeest, T. P. Johnson, and V. L. Welch Methodologies for Improving Response Rates in Surveys of Physicians: A Systematic Review Eval Health Prof, December 1, 2007; 30(4): 303 - 321. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. D Halpern and D. A Asch Commentary: Improving response rates to mailed surveys: what do we learn from randomized controlled trials? Int. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2003; 32(4): 637 - 638. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|