Tyson Kesley, Harvey Jillian, Forney Leila, Brinton Daniel
Clinical Research Center, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Department of Healthcare Leadership and Management, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, United States of America.
J Clin Transl Res. 2024;10(4):229-236. doi: 10.36922/jctr.24.00022. Epub 2024 Aug 20.
Since 2020, the number of registered clinical trials has surged by over 30%, significantly increasing the demand for skilled coordinators. Despite this growth, a national shortage of qualified coordinators remains, driven by escalating responsibilities and workloads. Effective resource management is crucial for retention. While the Ontario Protocol Assessment Level (OPAL) helps quantify trial complexity, it overlooks key factors such as organizational structure and budget constraints that impact coordinator productivity. This project aims to refine the OPAL score by integrating it with longitudinal coordinator effort data, improving resource allocation, operational efficiency, and job satisfaction, thereby reducing burnout and turnover.
The aim of this study was to reduce burnout and turnover, ultimately contributing to the overall success of clinical trials.
Actively enrolling interventional studies with corresponding coordinator effort tracking from June 1, 2022, to December 1, 2022, were included in the database. Protocols were graded using an adapted protocol assessment tool. Descriptive statistics compared protocol characteristics to the adapted assessment score and tracked coordinator hours, while Student's t-test and univariate analysis evaluated differences in continuous variables. Linear regression analysis assessed the association between the adapted score and the coordinator effort.
Seven protocols were analyzed: five (71%) were federally funded, two (29%) were industry-sponsored; four (57%) were behavioral interventions, and three (43%) were drug studies. Significant differences were observed between industry-sponsored and federally funded studies (7.25 ± 1.77 vs. 6.45 ± 1.65; < 0.0001) and between behavioral interventions and drug studies (6.88 ± 1.56 vs. 6.42 ± 1.91; < 0.0001). Linear regression revealed the adapted OPAL score significantly predicted coordinator hours ( = 77.22; = 0.01; = 0.78).
The adapted protocol complexity scores predict coordinator effort, aiding in capacity assessment and objective project distribution.
The findings from this project can inform more precise resource allocation, potentially leading to higher-quality studies and enhanced participant safety.
自2020年以来,注册临床试验的数量激增了30%以上,对熟练协调员的需求显著增加。尽管有这种增长,但由于职责和工作量不断增加,全国合格协调员仍然短缺。有效的资源管理对留住人才至关重要。虽然安大略方案评估水平(OPAL)有助于量化试验复杂性,但它忽略了影响协调员生产力的关键因素,如组织结构和预算限制。本项目旨在通过将OPAL评分与协调员长期工作投入数据相结合来完善该评分,提高资源分配、运营效率和工作满意度,从而减少倦怠和人员流动。
本研究的目的是减少倦怠和人员流动,最终促进临床试验的整体成功。
数据库纳入了2022年6月1日至2022年12月1日期间正在积极招募的干预性研究,并对相应的协调员工作投入进行跟踪。使用一种经过调整的方案评估工具对方案进行评分。描述性统计将方案特征与调整后的评估分数进行比较,并跟踪协调员的工作时长,而学生t检验和单变量分析评估连续变量的差异。线性回归分析评估调整后的分数与协调员工作投入之间的关联。
分析了7个方案:5个(71%)由联邦政府资助,2个(29%)由行业赞助;4个(57%)是行为干预,3个(43%)是药物研究。在行业赞助和联邦政府资助的研究之间(7.25±1.77对6.45±1.65;<0.0001)以及行为干预和药物研究之间(6.88±1.56对6.42±1.91;<0.0001)观察到显著差异。线性回归显示,调整后的OPAL评分显著预测了协调员的工作时长(=77.22;=0.01;=0.78)。
调整后的方案复杂性评分可预测协调员的工作投入,有助于能力评估和客观的项目分配。
本项目的研究结果可为更精确的资源分配提供参考,可能带来更高质量的研究并提高参与者的安全性。