Informing primary care physicians of patients' involvement in clinical trials carried out at a specialist care level

dc.contributor.author
Schoenenberger, Joan Antoni
dc.contributor.author
Solanilla Puertolas, Montserrat
dc.contributor.author
Acer Puig, Maria
dc.contributor.author
Gómez Arbonés, Javier
dc.date.accessioned
2024-12-05T21:26:31Z
dc.date.available
2024-12-05T21:26:31Z
dc.date.issued
2017-11-09T18:02:58Z
dc.date.issued
2017-11-09T18:02:58Z
dc.date.issued
2017-07-27
dc.date.issued
2017-11-09T18:02:58Z
dc.identifier
https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJCT.S134555
dc.identifier
1179-1519
dc.identifier
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/60453
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/60453
dc.description.abstract
Background: Patients enrolled in clinical trials continue to have frequent contacts with primary care physicians because of comorbidities or toxicities. The aim of the present study was to analyze the information provided at different levels, when participants are included in clinical trials organized at a specialized care level. The purpose was to verify if informing the patient's primary care physician is contemplated in the inclusion process. Methods: The authors conducted a cross-sectional study that included the clinical trials approved in the last 2 years by the hospital's Institutional Review Board. In addition, some of the participants in the included clinical trials were interviewed in order to check their knowledge of the type of research taking place. Results: In total, 67 protocols and the accompanying informed consent documents were reviewed. Half of the reviewed protocols (48%) did not provide participants with an identification card. Regarding the role of the primary care physician, 68.6% of clinical trials (46/67) had taken it into account in different ways. In only four trials, the method used to contact the primary care physician was documented. In total, 20 participants were interviewed. Only 3 (15%) knew the title of the study in which they were participating, 14 (70%) were aware of their illness and 6 (30%) did not know how to answer any of these two questions. Almost all participants in the study knew the name of the physician who was the principal investigator in the trial. Conclusion: Information given to health care practitioners, who are not directly involved in clinical trials conducted by specialized medical staff, is still scarce. In our clinical setting, patients participating in clinical trials have a low awareness of such studies. Keywords: informed consent, clinical trials, family physician, wallet card
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language
eng
dc.publisher
Dove Medical Press
dc.relation
Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJCT.S134555
dc.relation
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials, 2017, vol. 2017, num. 9, p. 59-64
dc.rights
cc-by-nc (c) Schoenenberger-Arnaiz JA, Solanilla-Puertolas M, Acer-Puig M, Gomez-Arbones J, 2017
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
dc.subject
Consentiment informat (Dret mèdic)
dc.subject
Medicina familiar.
dc.subject
Assaigs clínics.
dc.subject
Informed consent (Medical law).
dc.subject
Family medicine.
dc.subject
Clinical trials.
dc.title
Informing primary care physicians of patients' involvement in clinical trials carried out at a specialist care level
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
publishedVersion


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)