Activating clinical trials: a process improvement approach

Abstract

BackgroundThe administrative process associated with clinical trial activation has been criticized as costly, complex, and time-consuming. Prior research has concentrated on identifying administrative barriers and proposing various solutions to reduce activation time, and consequently associated costs. Here, we expand on previous research by incorporating social network analysis and discrete-event simulation to support process improvement decision-making.MethodsWe searched for all operational data associated with the administrative process of activating industry-sponsored clinical trials at the Office of Clinical Research of the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. We limited the search to those trials initiated and activated between July 2011 and June 2012. We described the process using value stream mapping, studied the interactions of the various process participants using social network analysis, and modeled potential process modifications using discrete-event simulation.ResultsThe administrative process comprised 5 sub-processes, 30 activities, 11 decision points, 5 loops, and 8 participants. The mean activation time was 76.6 days. Rate-limiting sub-processes were those of contract and budget development. Key participants during contract and budget development were the Office of Clinical Research, sponsors, and the principal investigator. Simulation results indicate that slight increments on the number of trials, arriving to the Office of Clinical Research, would increase activation time by 11 %. Also, incrementing the efficiency of contract and budget development would reduce the activation time by 28 %. Finally, better synchronization between contract and budget development would reduce time spent on batching documentation; however, no improvements would be attained in total activation time.ConclusionThe presented process improvement analytic framework not only identifies administrative barriers, but also helps to devise and evaluate potential improvement scenarios. The strength of our framework lies in its system analysis approach that recognizes the stochastic duration of the activation process and the interdependence between process activities and entities.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1227-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The clinical trials activation process: a case study of an Italian Public Hospital

“…The time required to activate a trial is even longer for studies with agreement, because after approval by the institution there are additional steps, which also depend on the rapidity of the sponsor's response. This has also been highlighted at other centers that have conducted an analysis related to the management of the trials activation process [9][10][11].…”

Personas for the translational workforce

“…A peek inside the goals, motivators, and pain points of CTS employees, however, can reveal some of the behind-the-scenes facets of their everyday lives that have a large impact on the effectiveness of clinical trials and by extension, translational research. For instance, around 40-55% of a research administrator's (RA) time in clinical trial activation is spent on contract and budget negotiation, which can mean as much as 44 days within a 70-80 day activation process [5]. By understanding the burden that contract and budget negotiation place on an RA, CTSA sites may be inspired to examine ways in which such processes can be streamlined, such as through the use of standardised or pre-negotiated contract and budget forms.…”

Non-cancer clinical trials start-up metrics at an academic medical center: Implications for advancing research

“…There are many reasons for a study to have delays between each step within the SSU process [ 5 , 6 ]. Different strategies are being developed to eliminate inefficiencies in SSU [ 7 ]. By measuring the time it takes to move from one step to the next in the process, it is possible to identify possible bottlenecks.…”