4.3 Article

Examining and Enabling the Role of Health Care Providers as Patient Engagement Facilitators in Clinical Trials

期刊

CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS
卷 39, 期 11, 页码 2203-2213

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.09.014

关键词

clinical trial referral practices; clinical trial referral rates; health care providers; patient engagement; social media and clinical trials

资金

  1. Roche
  2. Sanofi
  3. Biogen
  4. EMD Serono
  5. Pfizer
  6. Novartis
  7. Amgen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development conducted a study among practicing physicians and nurses (health care providers) across multiple specialties to assess their attitudes and experiences with referring patients into clinical trials and to supplement the body of scholarly research focused primarily on referral practices among oncology-based health care providers. Methods: A total of 755 physicians and 1255 nurses completed online surveys in late 2015 and early 2016. Findings: The results of the study indicate that a high percentage of multispecialty nurses and physicians is interested in referring their patients to appropriate clinical trials, are familiar with the clinical trial process, and are comfortable providing clinical trial information to, and discussing clinical trial opportunities with, their patients. Study results also indicate, however, that health care providers refer only a small number of patients each year largely because of the inability to access clinical trial information and the lack of sufficient information and time to evaluate and confidently discuss clinical trial options with their patients. Implications: Many reasons for choosing not to refer patients appear addressable, particularly through effective but presently-underused communication leveraging social media communities and using liaisons who can act as a bridge between clinical care and clinical research. (C) 2017 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据