Electronic mail was not better than postal mail for surveying residents and faculty.
OBJECTIVE
To compare response rate, time to response, and data quality of electronic and postal surveys in the setting of postgraduate medical education.


METHODS
A randomized controlled trial in a university-based internal medicine residency program. We randomized 119 residents and 83 faculty to an electronic versus a postal survey with up to two reminders and measured response rate, time to response, and data quality.


RESULTS
For residents, the e-survey resulted in a lower response rate than the postal survey (63.3% versus 79.7%; difference -16.3%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -32.3% to -0.4%%; P=.049), but a shorter mean response time, by 3.8 days (95% CI 0.2-7.4; P=.042). For faculty, the e-survey did not result in a significantly lower response rate than the postal survey (85.4% vs. 81.0%; difference 4.4%, 95% CI -11.7 to 20.5%; P=.591), but resulted in a shorter average response time, by 8.4 days (95% CI 4.4 to 12.4; P < 0.001). There were no differences in the quality of data or responses to the survey between the two methods.


CONCLUSIONS
E-surveys were not superior to postal surveys in terms of response rate, but resulted in shorter time to response and equivalent data quality.
Akl
Elie A
EA
Department of Medicine, State University of New York, University at Buffalo, ECMC-CC 142, 462 Grider Street, Buffalo, NY 14215, USA.
Maroun
Nancy
N
Klocke
Robert A
RA
Montori
Victor
V
Schünemann
Holger J
HJ
D000328:Adult; D003625:Data Collection / Q000592:standards; D004503:Education, Medical, Graduate; D034742:Electronic Mail; D005178:Faculty; D005260:Female; D006306:Health Surveys; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009518:New York; D011177:Postal Service; D013997:Time Factors; D014495:Universities