Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial

Background and Objectives: To compare general practitioner (GP) response to a telephone interview With response to a postal survey with three reminders ill a randomized controlled trial. Methods: GPs were randomly assigned to either a telephone interview or a postal survey. GPs in the telephone group were mailed a letter of invitation and asked to undertake a telephone interview. GPs in the postal group were mailed a letter of invitation and questionnaire. Non-responders were sent up to three reminders. the final by registered post. Response rates were calculated for each group. Results: 4 16 GPs were randomized to the telephone interview and 45 1 to the postal survey. Eighty-six in the telephone group and 30 ill the postal were ineligible. One hundred thirty-four GPs completed the telephone interview with a response rate of 40.6% (95% confidence interval 101: 35.3%, 46.1%). Two hundred fifty-two GPs completed the postal survey with a response rate of 59.9% (95% CI: 55.0%, 64.6%). The difference in response was 19.3% (95% CI: 12.2%. 26.3%). Conclusions: These results show that postal surveys with three reminders can have superior response rates compared with a telephone interview. (C) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.