Wiersma Miriam, Kerridge Ian, Lipworth Wendy
Department of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney Health Ethics, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Health Ethics, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Haematology Department, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2025 Sep;31(6):e70274. doi: 10.1111/jep.70274.
Clinical innovation-where physicians develop and use novel interventions that differ significantly from standard practice and that have not been shown to be sufficiently safe or effective for regular use in healthcare systems-has the potential to transform patient care and drive medical advancement. However, it is not without risk. It is important, therefore, that policymakers and healthcare institutions develop strategies to encourage responsible clinical innovation. For these strategies to be effective, they need to be based on a comprehensive understanding of the factors driving physicians' development and use of innovative interventions. While research has provided important insights into contextual barriers and facilitators, individual factors, particularly physicians' interests, remain underexplored.
The aims of this qualitative study were to investigate the factors that drive and deter clinical innovation in diverse medical specialties and to examine whether these factors differ significantly between specialties.
Thirty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with Australian physicians from surgery, reproductive medicine, and cancer care.
Physicians' interests (e.g., obligations to patients and personal financial concerns) were perceived to play an important role in driving their use of innovative interventions, along with individual traits and contextual factors. There were also significant differences between specialties-with fertility specialists and surgeons more strongly emphasizing financial and commercial interests as key drivers of clinical innovation than oncologists.
Our findings suggest that while addressing structural barriers to clinical innovation at the health system level remains important, policymakers must also give attention to the diverse interests of physician-innovators. Understanding these interests, the ways in which they align and conflict, and which are most prominent across different specialties, will enable policymakers and healthcare institutions to develop targeted strategies to encourage physician-led innovation and ensure it is responsible.
临床创新——即医生开发并使用与标准医疗实践有显著差异且尚未被证明在医疗系统中常规使用足够安全或有效的新型干预措施——有潜力改变患者护理并推动医学进步。然而,这并非没有风险。因此,政策制定者和医疗机构制定鼓励负责任的临床创新的策略非常重要。要使这些策略有效,就需要全面了解推动医生开发和使用创新干预措施的因素。虽然研究已对背景障碍和促进因素提供了重要见解,但个体因素,尤其是医生的兴趣,仍未得到充分探索。
本定性研究的目的是调查推动和阻碍不同医学专科临床创新的因素,并检验这些因素在不同专科之间是否存在显著差异。
对来自外科、生殖医学和癌症护理领域的澳大利亚医生进行了31次半结构化访谈。
医生的兴趣(如对患者的责任和个人财务担忧)以及个体特质和背景因素被认为在推动他们使用创新干预措施方面发挥着重要作用。不同专科之间也存在显著差异——与肿瘤学家相比,生育专家和外科医生更加强调财务和商业利益是临床创新的关键驱动因素。
我们的研究结果表明,虽然在卫生系统层面解决临床创新的结构性障碍仍然很重要,但政策制定者也必须关注创新医生的不同利益。了解这些利益、它们的一致和冲突方式以及在不同专科中最突出的利益,将使政策制定者和医疗机构能够制定有针对性的策略,以鼓励医生主导的创新并确保其负责任。