The Library

Paying clinicians to join clinical trials : a review of guidelines and interview study of trialists

Tools

Raftery, James, Kerr, Christine, Hawker, Sheila and Powell, John. (2009) Paying clinicians to join clinical trials : a review of guidelines and interview study of trialists. Trials, Vol.10 (No.15). ISSN 1745-6215

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Kerr_Paying_Clinicans_1745-6215-10-15.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (252Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-10-15

Abstract

Background: The motivations of clinicians to participate in clinical trials have been little studied. This project explored the potential role of payment for participation in publicly funded clinical trials in the UK. The aims were to review relevant guidelines and to collate and analyse views of clinical trialists on the role of payments and other factors that motivated clinicians to join clinical trials. Methods: Review of guidelines governing payments to clinicians for recruitment to trials. Semistructured interviews with a range of NHS clinical trial leaders, analysed using qualititative methods. Results: While UK guidelines had little to say specifically on payments linked to recruitment, all payments have become highly regulated and increasingly transparent. Interview participants believed that expenses arising from research should be covered. Payments in excess of expenses were seen as likely to increase participation but with the risk of reducing quality. Motivations such as interest in the topic, the scope for patients to benefit and intellectual curiosity were considered more important. Barriers to involvement included bureaucracy and lack of time. Discussion: Limited scope exists for paying clinicians over-and-above the cost of their time to be involved in research. Most trialists favour full payment of all expenses related to research. Conclusion: Payment of clinicians beyond expenses is perceived to be a less important motivating factor than researching important, salient questions, and facilitating research by reducing bureaucracy and delay.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Divisions:	Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Clinical trials -- Great Britain, Medical fees -- Great Britain
Journal or Publication Title:	Trials
Publisher:	BioMed Central Ltd.
ISSN:	1745-6215
Date:	10 March 2009
Volume:	Vol.10
Number:	No.15
Number of Pages:	6
Identification Number:	10.1186/1745-6215-10-15
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Funder:	NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (Great Britain)
References:	1. Prescott RJ, Counsell CE, Gillespie WJ, Grant AM, Russell IT, Kiauka S, et al.: Factors that limit the quality, number and progress of randomised controlled trials. Health Technology Assessment 1999, 3(20iii-139 [http://www.ncchta.org/project/htapubs.asp]. 2. Campbell MK, Snowden C, Francis D, Elbourne D, McDonald AM, Knight R, Enthwistel V, Garcia J, Roberts I, Grant A, (the STEPS group): Recruitment to randomised trials: strategies for trial enrolment and participation study. The STEPS study. Health Technology Assessment 2007, 11(48): [http://www.ncchta.org/project/ htapubs.asp]. 3. Charlson ME, Horwitz RI: Applying results of randomised trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomisation. British Medical Journal 1984, 289(6454):1281-4. 4. Jack WJ, Chetty U, Rodger A: Recruitment to a prospective breast conservation trial: why are so few patients randomised? British Medical Journal 1990, 301:83-5. 5. Peto V, Coulter A, Bond A: Factors affecting general practitioners' recruitment of patients into a prospective study. Fam Pract 1993, 10(2):207-11. 6. Clinical Research Report: Pharmaceutical Industry Competitive Task Force. 2002 [http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/pictf/clin icalresearch.htm]. Department of Health 7. Fayter D, McDaid C, Ritchie G, Stirk L, Eastwood A: Systematic Review of Barriers, Modifiers and Benefits Involved in Participation in Cancer Trials. In Centre for Reviews and Dissemination University of York; York; 2006. Report No.: 31 8. Rendell JM, Merrit RK, Geddes JR: Incentives and disincentives to participation by clinicians in randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:MR000021. 9. Bryant J, Powell J: Payment to healthcare professionals for patient recruitment to trials: a systematic review. British Medical Journal 2005, 331:1377-1378. 10. Asch S, Connor SE, Hamilton EG, Fox SA: Problems in recruiting community based physicians for health services research. J Gen Intern Med 2000, 15(8):591-9. 11. Raftery J, Bryant J, Powell H, Kerr C, Hawker S: Payment to healthcare professionals for patient recruitment to trials: systematic review and qualitative study. Health Technology Assessment 2008, 12(10): [http://www.ncchta.org/project/hta pubs.asp]. 12. Current Clincal Trials [http://www.controlled-trials.com/] 13. Hawker S, Kerr C: Doing grounded theory. In Analysing quantitative data in psychology Edited by: Lyons E, Coyle A. Sage Publications, London; 2007:87-97. 14. Nvivo: Qualitataive data analysis software. Version 2.0 [computer program] 1999. 15. Department of Health: National Health Service income generation – Best practice: Revised guidance on income generation in the NHS. London 2006. 16. Department of Health: Guidance for R&D Managers in NHS Trusts and Clinical Research Departments in the Pharmaceutical Industry. London 2001 [http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4007728]. 17. Department of Health: Governance arrangements for NHS research ethics committees. London 2001 [http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publication sandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/ DH_4005727]. 18. General Medical Council: Research: The Role and Responsibilities of Doctors. London 2002 [http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/current/library/ research.asp]. 19. Association of British Pharmaceutical Industries: Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry. London 2006 [http://www.abpi.org.uk/links/ assoc/PMCPA/pmpca_code2006.pdf]. updated annually 20. Medical Research Council: MRC Clinical Trials Series, MRC guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London 1998 [http:// www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/ index.htm?d=MRC002416]. 21. British Medical Association: British Medical Association – Ethical considerations. London 2006. 22. Department of Health: Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care, London 2nd edition. 2005. 23. Department of Health: Commercial sponsorship- ethical standards for the NHS. London 2000 [http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatis tics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4005135]. 24. Department of Health: Best research for best health. London 2006.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/523