Training and Expertise

Since inception, CERC has worked on 180 research projects and is staffed by five skilled research professionals with credentials from complementary health-related fields with many years of experience in health research and related activities. CERC completes and maintains core research competencies (e.g., human subjects protections). Additionally, the team seeks numerous additional training opportunities contributing to their collective knowledge of community-engaged research (e.g., community-based participatory research, mental health first aid, implicit bias, health communication theory, and mixed methods research). When study teams collaborate with CERC, they have immediate access to highly trained and qualified staff.

Attention to Efficiency and Multitasking

Contracts with CERC range from a few hours for one task or receive support from multiple team members for numerous hours over the course of the project. As staff leave, CERC works behind the scenes to train replacements while projects continue without losing time or money due to turnover. Further, working with CERC ensures a team with a wide-reaching network across the state. Individuals share recruitment ideas, often drawing from past connections or experience. Additionally, CERC works on multiple projects simultaneously and often travel to various rural areas of the state and the team can combine efforts as they travel and recruit for numerous projects in one trip.

Commitment to Community

With the large number of community-engaged studies and related activities in which CERC is involved, the team has extensive collective statewide community-specific knowledge. For example, one team member conducted stakeholder interviews in rural areas across New Mexico [Reference Ginossar, Rishel Brakey and Sussman8] and transfers that community-specific knowledge to other projects (e.g., knowing and respecting that community’s culture and its preferred communication methods or venues). Additionally, another team member’s sole purpose is to build and enhance long-term, bidirectional communications between researchers and community stakeholders by developing partnerships with local primary care clinics, community health councils, community health workers, and other health-related stakeholders [Reference Sussman, Cordova and Burge6]. These relationships and established trust increase CERC acceptance by communities when recruiting for research projects.

Study Overview and Recruitment

New Mexico was the setting of a study examining the impact of an online, interactive education and support model to help rural PCPs start and expand medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder (described elsewhere[Reference Salvador, Bhatt and Jacobsohn9]). With less than 10% of the approximate 2,000 PCPs in the state prescribing to at least 10 patients [3,10], there is much opportunity to expand this treatment. Therefore, a critical step for this project was recruiting PCPs to participate in the curriculum intervention and accompanying study – a task that is simple in concept but difficult in practice.

Despite high rates of opioid addiction [Reference Keyes, Cerdá, Brady, Havens and Galea11], scarce local treatment options [Reference Cyr, Etchin, Guthrie and Benneyan12], and strong evidence in favor of PCP-delivered medication-assisted treatment [13], the study team struggled to recruit providers. Aside from general challenges of recruiting PCPs into research projects, this study posed additional barriers because of its focus on treating opioid use disorder using buprenorphine. There is ample research describing barriers to this treatment, including stigma toward persons with OUD, lack of confidence and knowledge providing this treatment, concerns with Drug Enforcement Agency audits, among others [Reference Andrilla, Coulthard and Larson14].

This study aimed to enroll 80 rural PCPs over 4 years. The team began recruitment November 2017, coordinated by a single full-time staff person within the study lead’s department. Efforts included faxing rural clinics, in-person and phone meetings, using various clinician listservs, attending conferences, partnering with a practice-based research network, and word of mouth. Providers who joined the study were eligible to receive monetary compensation for data collection activities and continuing education units for participation in the curriculum training intervention. These efforts, unfortunately, were not sufficient to meet recruitment goals as it moved into its second year. Recruitment difficulties the study team experienced are not uncommon. It is hard for investigators to establish and maintain connections with communities and find staff who have familiarity with best practices in community-engaged research [Reference Michener, Cook, Ahmed, Yonas, Coyne-Beasley and Aguilar-Gaxiola15]. In September 2018, the study team sought support for recruitment and turned to CERC to employ other engagement strategies from staff with established community engagement and recruitment experience.

CERC Involvement

After a short initiation period, the CERC and study teams divided their efforts by role and function. CERC was primarily responsible for recruitment, enrollment, and data collection while the original study team concentrated on intervention implementation, funder reporting, and dissemination (Table 1). Throughout this process, the CERC and study teams worked closely together, meeting weekly to discuss recruitment efforts, challenges, and strategies.

Table 1. Primary responsibilities of the study team and CERC^*

* Community Engagement and Research Core.

Impact on Recruitment. Once the study team collaborated with CERC, recruitment went up threefold over 1 year (Fig. 1). Prior to CERC’s involvement, from November 2017 to September 2018, eight PCPs enrolled. Within 1 year after CERC joined the team (October 2018), 27 new PCPs joined the study and steadily increased until reaching the recruitment goal (n = 80) in October 2021.

Fig. 1. Number of cumulative providers enrolled into study before and after involving CERC*. *Community Engagement and Research Core.

CERC’s Strategies for Success

Following a brief period of study orientation and review of previous recruitment methods, the CERC team revised strategies and applied their established model for recruitment of training and expertise, efficiency and multitasking, and commitment to community (Table 2).

Table 2. CERC^* model to promote recruitment as it applies to one study

* Community Engagement and Research Core.

For an equivalent cost of one full-time study coordinator, CERC provided five team members to the study and immediately helped by sharing established connections and past recruitment successes. Throughout this partnership, as study team staff turnover occurred, they did not hire replacements and relied more on CERC’s services. As CERC staff turnover happened, the study continued seamlessly, as CERC trained their new staff behind the scenes, with no time lost or additional cost to the research project.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, CERC relied heavily on in-person recruitment visits, including cross-promotion of multiple studies to enhance reach. This strategy expanded recruitment and maximized limited resources needed to connect with prospective providers and clinic sites throughout the state (e.g., associated travel expenses and staff time). Recruitment slowed during the first year of the pandemic (March 2020 to February 2021), as demonstrated in Fig. 1. Providers were facing numerous pandemic-related challenges [Reference Xiong and Peng16,Reference Eftekhar Ardebili, Naserbakht, Bernstein, Alazmani-Noodeh, Hakimi and Ranjbar17], and CERC and the study team re-strategized recruitment techniques, relying more on virtual methods (e.g., phone calls, faxes, virtual presentations) and provider-to-provider recruitment. While CERC never traveled again for this study, the team was still able to enroll providers steadily.

With their knowledge and experience in community-engaged research, CERC did everything they could to make their efforts community centric. For example, the team knew of and used specific approaches to recruitment in specific communities (e.g., work with community gatekeepers prior to approaching clinics and not to dress “too city” in certain areas [Reference Ginossar, Rishel Brakey and Sussman8]). Additionally, CERC adapted to each clinic’s capacity and communication styles. Often, clinics would express they were unable to participate in the study due to time constraints, limited staff and resources, or perceived leadership priorities; CERC acknowledged, documented, and responded effectively. For example, at initial contact to one clinic, a representative asked for the team to reach out months later. CERC worked collaboratively and internally documented each encounter so everyone was aware of the clinic’s level of engagement and when to contact them again. With this, CERC was able to acknowledge and respect the clinic’s needs and interest.

Finally, to establish more bidirectional relationships, CERC disseminated study results back to participants and communities through health council presentations, demonstrating how participation in this study was impacting their community by increasing the number of prescribers providing medication-assisted treatment. The goal was to promote interest in the project and have PCPs join or share with others who may be interested in the study.