RSM logo
JRSM

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J R Soc Med 2007;100:101-104
doi:10.1258/jrsm.100.2.101
© 2007 Royal Society of Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Send a Quick Comment
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Quick Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JRSM
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Salman, R. A.-S.
Right arrow Articles by Warlow, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
J R Soc Med 2007;100:101-104
© 2007 The Royal Society of Medicine

Research governance impediments to clinical trials: a retrospective survey

Rustam Al-Shahi Salman1 Timothy M Brock2 Martin S Dennis3 Peter A G Sandercock4 Philip M White5   Charles Warlow6

1 MRC Clinician Scientist, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
2 Medical Student, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
3 Professor of Stroke Medicine, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
4 Professor of Clinical Neurology, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
5 Consultant Neuroradiologist, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
6 Professor of Medical Neurology, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK

Correspondence to: Rustam Al-Shahi Salman E-mail: Rustam.Al-Shahi{at}ed.ac.uk

Objective We sought to evaluate the delays, between-centre variations in practice, and opportunity costs attributable to delays in research governance approval of clinical trials in the United Kingdom.

Design Retrospective survey.

Setting Research and Development (R&D) departments at 50 UK National Health Service hospital trusts governing 57 hospital sites.

Participants R&D departments participating in four randomized multicentre clinical trials coordinated by our Neurosciences Trials Unit.

Interventions None.

Main outcome measures Median delay between application and research governance approval.

Results Only half of the R&D departments used the UK online R&D form. Only a single copy of the application was required by 96% of R&D departments. The median delay between application and research governance approval was 44 working days (inter-quartile range 23-80). A delay of >20 working days was incurred by 43 applications (75%), of which 24 (56%) were not explicable and 11 (20%) were attributable to local funding negotiations. Based on the trial randomization rates at each centre, 108 patients (17% of all patients randomized) could have been randomized during the delay, at a crude cost to funding agencies of £53,743; if a four week delay was deemed acceptable, 75 patients (12% of all patients randomized) could have been randomized during unacceptable delays, at a crude cost to funding agencies of £37,700.

Conclusions The UK research governance system incurs unacceptably long and costly delays for clinical trials. Urgent reform is needed, including rapid design and uniform implementation of the ‘bureaucracy busting’ measures in Best Research for Best Health.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Related articles in JRSM:

Children, doctors, trials: a survival game
Kamran Abbasi
JRSM 2007 100: 59. [Full Text]  

Bypassing bureaucracy to answer important questions quickly
Jonathan Emery-Barker, Iain McClure, Alison Wood, Rachel Robertson, and Helen Minnis
JRSM 2008 101: 217-218. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JRSMHome page
A. A Mallick and F. J. O'Callaghan
Research governance delays for a multicentre non-interventional study
J R Soc Med, May 1, 2009; 102(5): 195 - 198.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JRSMHome page
A. Hackshaw, H. Farrant, S. Bulley, M. J Seckl, and J. A Ledermann
Setting up non-commercial clinical trials takes too long in the UK: findings from a prospective study
J R Soc Med, June 1, 2008; 101(6): 299 - 304.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JRSMHome page
J. Emery-Barker, I. McClure, A. Wood, R. Robertson, and H. Minnis
Bypassing bureaucracy to answer important questions quickly
J R Soc Med, May 1, 2008; 101(5): 217 - 218.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Get Through Series