Risk-Based Quality Management: A Case for Centralized Monitoring.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1007/s43441-024-00719-1
Nicole Stansbury, Danilo Branco, Cris McDavid, Jennifer Stewart, Kristin Surdam, Nycole Olson, Joanne Perry, Jeremy Liska, Linda Phillips, Amanda Coogan, Anina Adelfio, Lauren Garson
{"title":"Risk-Based Quality Management: A Case for Centralized Monitoring.","authors":"Nicole Stansbury, Danilo Branco, Cris McDavid, Jennifer Stewart, Kristin Surdam, Nycole Olson, Joanne Perry, Jeremy Liska, Linda Phillips, Amanda Coogan, Anina Adelfio, Lauren Garson","doi":"10.1007/s43441-024-00719-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since 2019, the Association of Clinical Research Organizations has conducted a landscape survey of risk based quality management (RBQM) adoption in clinical trials. Here, we present data from four years of surveys, with an emphasis on the most recent: the 2022 survey included data from 4958 trials across seven contract research organizations, of which 1004 were new studies started in 2022. Results indicate that while overall risk assessment adoption is strong, it is lagging in other risk-based components which suggests companies are not deriving the full expected benefits of performing a risk assessment and mitigation process to their trials. The 2022 study also suggests new study starts showing promising traction, with adoption hovering near 50% for most RBQM elements. At the same time, the survey suggests industry has mixed views on the potential value of quality tolerance limits (QTLs). Ultimately, centralized monitoring is being underutilized despite the potential of increased patient safety oversight and improved data quality. The authors of this paper developed a case study based on a trial in clinicaltrials.gov to demonstrate how RBQM adoption could include the key RBQM elements such as centralized monitoring, reduced source data review and source data verification as well as implementation of QTLs in a real-world scenario. The authors believe the clinical trial industry has an obligation to utilize centralized monitoring to produce more efficient and effective clinical trials and will make a case to do so in this paper.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00719-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since 2019, the Association of Clinical Research Organizations has conducted a landscape survey of risk based quality management (RBQM) adoption in clinical trials. Here, we present data from four years of surveys, with an emphasis on the most recent: the 2022 survey included data from 4958 trials across seven contract research organizations, of which 1004 were new studies started in 2022. Results indicate that while overall risk assessment adoption is strong, it is lagging in other risk-based components which suggests companies are not deriving the full expected benefits of performing a risk assessment and mitigation process to their trials. The 2022 study also suggests new study starts showing promising traction, with adoption hovering near 50% for most RBQM elements. At the same time, the survey suggests industry has mixed views on the potential value of quality tolerance limits (QTLs). Ultimately, centralized monitoring is being underutilized despite the potential of increased patient safety oversight and improved data quality. The authors of this paper developed a case study based on a trial in clinicaltrials.gov to demonstrate how RBQM adoption could include the key RBQM elements such as centralized monitoring, reduced source data review and source data verification as well as implementation of QTLs in a real-world scenario. The authors believe the clinical trial industry has an obligation to utilize centralized monitoring to produce more efficient and effective clinical trials and will make a case to do so in this paper.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
Development of a Drug Safety Signal Detection Reference Set Using Japanese Safety Information. Consumer Understanding of Prescription Drug Indications in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertisements. Inside the Mind of the DMC: A Review of Principles and Issues with Case Studies. Mixture Disease Progression Model to Predict and Cluster the Long-Term Trajectory of Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer's Disease. Risk-Based Quality Management: A Case for Centralized Monitoring.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1