Why are organisational approvals needed for low-risk staff studies in the UK? Procedures, barriers, and burdens
Authors
Dunleavy, LesleyBoard, Ruth
Coyle, Seamus
Dickman, Andrew
Ellershaw, John
Gadoud, Amy
Halvorsen, Jaime
Hulbert-Williams, Nick
Lightbody, Liz
Mason, Stephen
Nwosu, Amara Callistus
Partridge, Andrea
Payne, Sheila
Preston, Nancy
Swash, Brooke
Taylor, Vanessa
Walshe, Catherine
Affiliation
Lancaster University; Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust; Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; University of Liverpool; NIHR Clinical Research Network North West Coast; Edge Hill University; University of Central Lancashire; University of Chester; University of HuddersfieldPublication Date
2024-11-15
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background: Health care staff should be given the opportunity to participate in research, but recruiting clinicians via their employing organisation is not always straightforward or quick in the UK. Unlike many countries outside the UK, very low-risk survey, interview or focus group studies can be subject to some of the same governance approval procedures as interventional studies. An exemplar study carried out by the NIHR funded Palliative Care Research Partnership North West Coast is used to highlight the challenges still faced by researchers and health care organisations when setting up a low-risk staff study across multiple NHS and non-NHS sites. Methods: A study database was created and information was collected on the first point of contact with the clinical site, Health Research Authority (HRA) and local organisational approval times, time from trust or hospice agreement to the first survey participant recruited and overall site survey recruitment numbers. Descriptive statistics (median, range) were used to analyse these data. Results: Across participating NHS trusts, it took a median of 147.5 days (range 99–195) from initial contact with the local collaborator to recruitment of the first survey participant and hospice sites mirrored these lengthy timescales (median 142 days, range 110–202). The lengthiest delays in the HRA approval process were the period between asking NHS trusts to assess whether they had capacity and capability to support the research and them granting local agreement. Local approval times varied between trusts and settings which may indicate organisations are applying national complex guidance differently. Conclusions: There is the potential for HRA processes to use more NHS resources than the research study itself when recruiting to a low-risk staff study across multiple organisations. There is a need to reduce unnecessary administrative burden and bureaucracy to give clinicians and research staff more opportunities to participate in research, and to free up NHS R&D departments, research nurses and clinicians to focus on more demanding and patient focused research studies. Hospices need standardised guidance on how to assess the risk of being involved in low-risk research without adopting the unnecessarily complex systems that are currently used within the NHS.Citation
Dunleavy, L., Board, R., Coyle, S., Dickman, A., Ellershaw, J., Gadoud, A., Halvorsen, J., Hulbert-Williams, N., Lightbody, L., Mason, S., Nwosu, A. C., Partridge, A., Payne, S., Preston, N., Swash, B., Taylor, V., & Walshe, C. (2024). Why are organisational approvals needed for low-risk staff studies in the UK? Procedures, barriers, and burdens. BMC Health Services Research, 24(1), article-number 1408. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11886-0Publisher
BioMed CentralJournal
BMC Health Services ResearchType
ArticleEISSN
1472-6963Sponsors
This project is funded by the NIHR Palliative and End of Life Care Research Partnerships Funding Committee [NIHR135334].ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1186/s12913-024-11886-0
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Licence for this article: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/