Cargando…

Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units

BACKGROUND: The costs of medical research are a concern. Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) need to better understand variations in the costs of their activities. METHODS: Representatives of ten CTUs and two grant-awarding bodies pooled their experiences in discussions over 1.5 years. Five of the CTUs pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hind, Daniel, Reeves, Barnaby C., Bathers, Sarah, Bray, Christopher, Corkhill, Andrea, Hayward, Christopher, Harper, Lynda, Napp, Vicky, Norrie, John, Speed, Chris, Tremain, Liz, Keat, Nicola, Bradburn, Mike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5414193/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28464930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1934-3
_version_ 1783233318470287360
author Hind, Daniel
Reeves, Barnaby C.
Bathers, Sarah
Bray, Christopher
Corkhill, Andrea
Hayward, Christopher
Harper, Lynda
Napp, Vicky
Norrie, John
Speed, Chris
Tremain, Liz
Keat, Nicola
Bradburn, Mike
author_facet Hind, Daniel
Reeves, Barnaby C.
Bathers, Sarah
Bray, Christopher
Corkhill, Andrea
Hayward, Christopher
Harper, Lynda
Napp, Vicky
Norrie, John
Speed, Chris
Tremain, Liz
Keat, Nicola
Bradburn, Mike
author_sort Hind, Daniel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The costs of medical research are a concern. Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) need to better understand variations in the costs of their activities. METHODS: Representatives of ten CTUs and two grant-awarding bodies pooled their experiences in discussions over 1.5 years. Five of the CTUs provided estimates of, and written justification for, costs associated with CTU activities required to implement an identical protocol. The protocol described a 5.5-year, nonpharmacological randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted at 20 centres. Direct and indirect costs, the number of full time equivalents (FTEs) and the FTEs attracting overheads were compared and qualitative methods (unstructured interviews and thematic analysis) were used to interpret the results. Four members of the group (funding-body representatives or award panel members) reviewed the justification statements for transparency and information content. Separately, 163 activities common to trials were assigned to roles used by nine CTUs; the consistency of role delineation was assessed by Cohen’s κ. RESULTS: Median full economic cost of CTU activities was £769,637 (range: £661,112 to £1,383,323). Indirect costs varied considerably, accounting for between 15% and 59% (median 35%) of the full economic cost of the grant. Excluding one CTU, which used external statisticians, the total number of FTEs ranged from 2.0 to 3.0; total FTEs attracting overheads ranged from 0.3 to 2.0. Variation in directly incurred staff costs depended on whether CTUs: supported particular roles from core funding rather than grants; opted not to cost certain activities into the grant; assigned clerical or data management tasks to research or administrative staff; employed extensive on-site monitoring strategies (also the main source of variation in non-staff costs). Funders preferred written justifications of costs that described both FTEs and indicative tasks for funded roles, with itemised non-staff costs. Consistency in role delineation was fair (κ = 0.21–0.40) for statisticians/data managers and poor for other roles (κ < 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Some variation in costs is due to factors outside the control of CTUs such as access to core funding and levels of indirect costs levied by host institutions. Research is needed on strategies to control costs appropriately, especially the implementation of risk-based monitoring strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1934-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5414193
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54141932017-05-03 Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units Hind, Daniel Reeves, Barnaby C. Bathers, Sarah Bray, Christopher Corkhill, Andrea Hayward, Christopher Harper, Lynda Napp, Vicky Norrie, John Speed, Chris Tremain, Liz Keat, Nicola Bradburn, Mike Trials Research BACKGROUND: The costs of medical research are a concern. Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) need to better understand variations in the costs of their activities. METHODS: Representatives of ten CTUs and two grant-awarding bodies pooled their experiences in discussions over 1.5 years. Five of the CTUs provided estimates of, and written justification for, costs associated with CTU activities required to implement an identical protocol. The protocol described a 5.5-year, nonpharmacological randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted at 20 centres. Direct and indirect costs, the number of full time equivalents (FTEs) and the FTEs attracting overheads were compared and qualitative methods (unstructured interviews and thematic analysis) were used to interpret the results. Four members of the group (funding-body representatives or award panel members) reviewed the justification statements for transparency and information content. Separately, 163 activities common to trials were assigned to roles used by nine CTUs; the consistency of role delineation was assessed by Cohen’s κ. RESULTS: Median full economic cost of CTU activities was £769,637 (range: £661,112 to £1,383,323). Indirect costs varied considerably, accounting for between 15% and 59% (median 35%) of the full economic cost of the grant. Excluding one CTU, which used external statisticians, the total number of FTEs ranged from 2.0 to 3.0; total FTEs attracting overheads ranged from 0.3 to 2.0. Variation in directly incurred staff costs depended on whether CTUs: supported particular roles from core funding rather than grants; opted not to cost certain activities into the grant; assigned clerical or data management tasks to research or administrative staff; employed extensive on-site monitoring strategies (also the main source of variation in non-staff costs). Funders preferred written justifications of costs that described both FTEs and indicative tasks for funded roles, with itemised non-staff costs. Consistency in role delineation was fair (κ = 0.21–0.40) for statisticians/data managers and poor for other roles (κ < 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Some variation in costs is due to factors outside the control of CTUs such as access to core funding and levels of indirect costs levied by host institutions. Research is needed on strategies to control costs appropriately, especially the implementation of risk-based monitoring strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1934-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5414193/ /pubmed/28464930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1934-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Hind, Daniel
Reeves, Barnaby C.
Bathers, Sarah
Bray, Christopher
Corkhill, Andrea
Hayward, Christopher
Harper, Lynda
Napp, Vicky
Norrie, John
Speed, Chris
Tremain, Liz
Keat, Nicola
Bradburn, Mike
Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title_full Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title_fullStr Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title_full_unstemmed Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title_short Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units
title_sort comparative costs and activity from a sample of uk clinical trials units
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5414193/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28464930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1934-3
work_keys_str_mv AT hinddaniel comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT reevesbarnabyc comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT batherssarah comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT braychristopher comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT corkhillandrea comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT haywardchristopher comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT harperlynda comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT nappvicky comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT norriejohn comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT speedchris comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT tremainliz comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT keatnicola comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits
AT bradburnmike comparativecostsandactivityfromasampleofukclinicaltrialsunits