Cargando…

Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response

PURPOSE: Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Draft Guidance for Industry on pharmaceutical REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) assessment and survey methodology highlights physician knowledge–attitudes–behaviors (KAB) surveys as regulatory science tools. This mixed-methods evaluation a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brewer, Sarah E., Campagna, Elizabeth J., Morrato, Elaine H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6799639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31660244
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.400
_version_ 1783460330466181120
author Brewer, Sarah E.
Campagna, Elizabeth J.
Morrato, Elaine H.
author_facet Brewer, Sarah E.
Campagna, Elizabeth J.
Morrato, Elaine H.
author_sort Brewer, Sarah E.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Draft Guidance for Industry on pharmaceutical REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) assessment and survey methodology highlights physician knowledge–attitudes–behaviors (KAB) surveys as regulatory science tools. This mixed-methods evaluation advances regulatory science and the assessment of FDA REMS programs when using physician surveys. We: (1) reviewed published physician survey response rates; and (2) assessed response bias in a simulation study of secondary survey data using different accrual cut-off strategies. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted of US physician surveys (2000–2014) on pharmaceutical use (n = 75). Kruskal–Wallis tests were used to examine the relationships between response rates and survey design characteristics. The simulation was conducted using secondary data from a population-based physician KAB survey on diabetes risk management with antipsychotic use in Missouri Medicaid (n = 973 accrued over 30 weeks). Survey item responses were compared using Pearson’s chi-square tests for two faster completion simulations: Fixed Sample (n = 300) and Fixed Time (8 weeks). RESULTS: Survey response rates ranged from 7% to 100% (median = 48%, IQR = 34%–68%). Surveys of targeted populations and surveys using member lists were associated with higher response rates (p = 0.02). In the simulation, 9 of 20 (45%) KAB items, including diabetes screening advocacy, differed significantly using the smaller Fixed Sample strategy (achieved in 12 days) versus full accrual. Fewer response differences were found using the Fixed Time strategy (2 of 20 [10%] items). CONCLUSIONS: Published data on physician surveys report low response rates with most associated with the sample source selected. FDA REMS assessments should include formal evaluation of survey accrual and response bias.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6799639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67996392019-10-28 Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response Brewer, Sarah E. Campagna, Elizabeth J. Morrato, Elaine H. J Clin Transl Sci Research Article PURPOSE: Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Draft Guidance for Industry on pharmaceutical REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) assessment and survey methodology highlights physician knowledge–attitudes–behaviors (KAB) surveys as regulatory science tools. This mixed-methods evaluation advances regulatory science and the assessment of FDA REMS programs when using physician surveys. We: (1) reviewed published physician survey response rates; and (2) assessed response bias in a simulation study of secondary survey data using different accrual cut-off strategies. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted of US physician surveys (2000–2014) on pharmaceutical use (n = 75). Kruskal–Wallis tests were used to examine the relationships between response rates and survey design characteristics. The simulation was conducted using secondary data from a population-based physician KAB survey on diabetes risk management with antipsychotic use in Missouri Medicaid (n = 973 accrued over 30 weeks). Survey item responses were compared using Pearson’s chi-square tests for two faster completion simulations: Fixed Sample (n = 300) and Fixed Time (8 weeks). RESULTS: Survey response rates ranged from 7% to 100% (median = 48%, IQR = 34%–68%). Surveys of targeted populations and surveys using member lists were associated with higher response rates (p = 0.02). In the simulation, 9 of 20 (45%) KAB items, including diabetes screening advocacy, differed significantly using the smaller Fixed Sample strategy (achieved in 12 days) versus full accrual. Fewer response differences were found using the Fixed Time strategy (2 of 20 [10%] items). CONCLUSIONS: Published data on physician surveys report low response rates with most associated with the sample source selected. FDA REMS assessments should include formal evaluation of survey accrual and response bias. Cambridge University Press 2019-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6799639/ /pubmed/31660244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.400 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Brewer, Sarah E.
Campagna, Elizabeth J.
Morrato, Elaine H.
Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title_full Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title_fullStr Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title_full_unstemmed Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title_short Advancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: A mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
title_sort advancing regulatory science and assessment of fda rems programs: a mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey response
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6799639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31660244
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.400
work_keys_str_mv AT brewersarahe advancingregulatoryscienceandassessmentoffdaremsprogramsamixedmethodsevaluationexaminingphysiciansurveyresponse
AT campagnaelizabethj advancingregulatoryscienceandassessmentoffdaremsprogramsamixedmethodsevaluationexaminingphysiciansurveyresponse
AT morratoelaineh advancingregulatoryscienceandassessmentoffdaremsprogramsamixedmethodsevaluationexaminingphysiciansurveyresponse