Cargando…
An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units
BACKGROUND: Good Clinical Practice guidelines issued in 2016 encourage risk-based approaches to monitoring clinical trials. This study compared current risk assessment and monitoring approaches in UK Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) with the published guidance and makes recommendations for risk-based mo...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500656 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3619-6 |
_version_ | 1783450164316340224 |
---|---|
author | Beever, Daniel Swaby, Lizzie |
author_facet | Beever, Daniel Swaby, Lizzie |
author_sort | Beever, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Good Clinical Practice guidelines issued in 2016 encourage risk-based approaches to monitoring clinical trials. This study compared current risk assessment and monitoring approaches in UK Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) with the published guidance and makes recommendations for risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials. METHODS: An online survey of UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered CTUs was administered via email invitation. Forty-nine units were invited, and 23 responded. Respondents were also invited to share copies of risk assessment templates. RESULTS: Most CTUs reported using remote combined with on-site monitoring. All reported undertaking a risk assessment for Clinical Trials of Investigational Medicinal Products (CTIMPs) and 21 units did so for non-CTIMPs. Most CTIMP risk assessments used MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) classifications, although some also employed staff judgement. Almost all units based their monitoring on perceived risk level; this number was higher for CTIMPs (n = 22) than for non-CTIMPs (n = 19). In most cases, monitoring plans were produced. More CTUs revisited risk assessments during trials in CTIMPs (n = 21) than in non-CTIMPs (n = 18). Small numbers of units reviewed the monitoring approach always (n = 4) or sometimes (n = 9) and few used the reflection to guide future monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of UK CTUs are using risk-based monitoring in the UK, as recommended by guidelines, for both CTIMPs and non-CTIMPs. This has the potential to make trials more efficient and reduce costs. However, there appears to be a lack of reflection on the value of these revised approaches. There may be a benefit in CTUs collaborating nationally to improve processes for reflection and making changes during the life course of a trial. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3619-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6734501 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67345012019-09-12 An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units Beever, Daniel Swaby, Lizzie Trials Research BACKGROUND: Good Clinical Practice guidelines issued in 2016 encourage risk-based approaches to monitoring clinical trials. This study compared current risk assessment and monitoring approaches in UK Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) with the published guidance and makes recommendations for risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials. METHODS: An online survey of UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered CTUs was administered via email invitation. Forty-nine units were invited, and 23 responded. Respondents were also invited to share copies of risk assessment templates. RESULTS: Most CTUs reported using remote combined with on-site monitoring. All reported undertaking a risk assessment for Clinical Trials of Investigational Medicinal Products (CTIMPs) and 21 units did so for non-CTIMPs. Most CTIMP risk assessments used MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) classifications, although some also employed staff judgement. Almost all units based their monitoring on perceived risk level; this number was higher for CTIMPs (n = 22) than for non-CTIMPs (n = 19). In most cases, monitoring plans were produced. More CTUs revisited risk assessments during trials in CTIMPs (n = 21) than in non-CTIMPs (n = 18). Small numbers of units reviewed the monitoring approach always (n = 4) or sometimes (n = 9) and few used the reflection to guide future monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of UK CTUs are using risk-based monitoring in the UK, as recommended by guidelines, for both CTIMPs and non-CTIMPs. This has the potential to make trials more efficient and reduce costs. However, there appears to be a lack of reflection on the value of these revised approaches. There may be a benefit in CTUs collaborating nationally to improve processes for reflection and making changes during the life course of a trial. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3619-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6734501/ /pubmed/31500656 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3619-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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 Beever, Daniel Swaby, Lizzie An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title | An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title_full | An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title_fullStr | An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title_full_unstemmed | An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title_short | An evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in UK Clinical Trials Units |
title_sort | evaluation of risk-based monitoring in pragmatic trials in uk clinical trials units |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500656 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3619-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT beeverdaniel anevaluationofriskbasedmonitoringinpragmatictrialsinukclinicaltrialsunits AT swabylizzie anevaluationofriskbasedmonitoringinpragmatictrialsinukclinicaltrialsunits AT beeverdaniel evaluationofriskbasedmonitoringinpragmatictrialsinukclinicaltrialsunits AT swabylizzie evaluationofriskbasedmonitoringinpragmatictrialsinukclinicaltrialsunits |