# How many sites should an orthopedic trauma prospective multicenter trial have? A marginal analysis of the Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium completed trials

## TL;DR

This study analyzes how the number of sites in orthopedic trauma trials affects costs and suggests ways to optimize site numbers for cost-effectiveness.

## Contribution

A novel marginal cost model is proposed to determine the optimal number of sites in multicenter orthopedic trauma trials.

## Key findings

- Excess costs from additional sites ranged from $17K to $330K across trials.
- Excess sites were identified in all 12 analyzed trials, with a median excess cost of $96K.
- Higher overhead costs require more sites to complete trials efficiently.

## Abstract

Multicenter trials in orthopedic trauma are costly, yet crucial to advance the science behind clinical care. The number of sites is a key cost determinant. Each site has a fixed overhead cost, so more sites cost more to the study. However, more sites can reduce total costs by shortening the study duration. We propose to determine the optimal number of sites based on known costs and predictable site enrollment.

This retrospective marginal analysis utilized administrative and financial data from 12 trials completed by the Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium. The studies varied in size, design, and clinical focus. Enrollment across the studies ranged from 1054 to 33 patients. Design ranged from an observational study with light data collection to a placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Initial modeling identified the optimal number of sites for each study and sensitivity analyses determined the sensitivity of the model to variation in fixed overhead costs.

No study was optimized in terms of the number of participating sites. Excess sites ranged from 2 to 39. Excess costs associated with extra sites ranged from $17K to $330K with a median excess cost of $96K. Excess costs were, on average, 7% of the total study budget. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that studies with higher overhead costs require more sites to complete the study as quickly as possible.

Our data support that this model may be used by clinical researchers to achieve future study goals in a more cost-effective manner.

Please see Table 1 for individual trial registration numbers and dates of registration.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-024-07917-0.