Feasibility and acceptability of a structured quality by design approach to enhancing the rigor of clinical studies at an academic health center

Abstract Introduction: Clinical trials are a critical step in the meaningful translation of biomedical discoveries into effective diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Quality by design (QbD) is a framework for embedding quality into the design, conduct, and monitoring of clinical trials. Here we report the feasibility and acceptability of a process for implementing QbD in clinical research at an academic health center via multidisciplinary design studios aimed at identifying and prioritizing critical to quality (CTQ) factors. Methods: The Clinical Trial Transformation Initiative’s Principles Document served as a guide to identify and categorize key CTQ factors, defined as elements of a clinical trial that are critical to patient safety and data integrity. Individual trials were reviewed in CTQ design studios (CTQ-DS) and the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention was examined through post-meeting interviews and surveys. Results: Eight clinical research protocols underwent the QbD evaluation process. The protocols ranged from multicenter randomized clinical trials to nonrandomized investigator-initiated studies. A developmental evaluation informed the iterative refinement of the CTQ-DS process, and post-meeting surveys revealed that CTQ-DS were highly valued by principal investigators (PIs) and resulted in multiple protocol changes. Conclusions: The present study demonstrated that QbD principles can be implemented to inform the design and conduct of clinical research at an academic health center using multidisciplinary design studios aimed at identifying and prioritizing CTQ elements. This approach was well received by the participants including study PIs. Future research will need to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in improving the quality of clinical research.

[1]  M. Landray,et al.  Enhancing clinical evidence by proactively building quality into clinical trials , 2016, Clinical trials.

[2]  Jonathan Stacks,et al.  Developmental Evaluation , 2011, Health promotion practice.

[3]  A. Bhatt International Council for Harmonisation E6(R2) addendum: Challenges of implementation , 2017, Perspectives in clinical research.

[4]  Duncan Neuhauser,et al.  Joseph Juran: overcoming resistance to organisational change , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[5]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful , 2016, PLoS medicine.

[6]  T. Concannon,et al.  Facilitating stakeholder engagement in early stage translational research , 2020, PloS one.

[7]  P. Harris,et al.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support , 2009, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[8]  H. Selker,et al.  From community engagement, to community-engaged research, to broadly engaged team science , 2017, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science.

[9]  S. Boccia,et al.  Mistrust in biomedical research and vaccine hesitancy: the forefront challenge in the battle against COVID-19 in Italy , 2020, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[10]  R. Frye,et al.  Strategies for recruitment and retention of participants in clinical trials. , 2011, JAMA.

[11]  L. Cottler,et al.  Engagement science: The core of dissemination, implementation, and translational research science , 2020, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science.

[12]  Rustam Al-Shahi Salman,et al.  Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management , 2014, The Lancet.

[13]  Joseph Moses Juran,et al.  Made in U.S.A.: a renaissance in quality. , 1993, Harvard business review.

[14]  David C. Atkins,et al.  Accelerating implementation of research in Learning Health Systems: Lessons learned from VA Health Services Research and NCATS Clinical Science Translation Award programs , 2020, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science.

[15]  W. Edwards Deming,et al.  Out of the Crisis , 1982 .

[16]  J. Kahn Beyond disclosure: the necessity of trust in biomedical research. , 2007, Cleveland Clinic journal of medicine.

[17]  B. Patrick-Lake Patient engagement in clinical trials: The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative’s leadership from theory to practical implementation , 2018, Clinical trials.

[18]  W. Alhazzani,et al.  COVID-19 coronavirus research has overall low methodological quality thus far: case in point for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine , 2020, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

[19]  Daniel Hind,et al.  Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme , 2017, BMJ Open.

[20]  G. Bernard,et al.  Community Engagement Studios: A Structured Approach to Obtaining Meaningful Input From Stakeholders to Inform Research , 2015, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[21]  R. Califf,et al.  Impediments to Clinical Research in the United States , 2012, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[22]  G. Bernard,et al.  A collaborative, academic approach to optimizing the national clinical research infrastructure: The first year of the Trial Innovation Network , 2018, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science.

[23]  Denise H. Daudelin,et al.  Implementing Common Metrics across the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) consortium , 2019, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science.

[24]  J. Jaiswal Whose Responsibility Is It to Dismantle Medical Mistrust? Future Directions for Researchers and Health Care Providers , 2019, Behavioral medicine.

[25]  M. Landray,et al.  Clinical Trials: Rethinking How We Ensure Quality , 2012 .

[26]  David Moher,et al.  Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research: who's listening? , 2016, The Lancet.