Меню
Идёт набор NCT05865964

Anthropological, Socio-cultural and Psychological Surgeons' Factors in Oncology and Brakes for Evaluation of Innovations

Наблюдательное Surgery

Ориентир для пациента и семьи

Простыми словами

Автоматическая сводка по структурированным данным реестра. Она помогает сориентироваться, но не заменяет официальный протокол или оценку врача.

Что изучают
Это наблюдательное исследование: исследуемое лечение участникам по протоколу не назначают.
Кому может быть актуально
Состояния в реестре: Surgery. Базовые параметры: от 18 лет · Все.
Что важно проверить
Возраст, диагноз и пол — только базовые ориентиры. Предыдущее лечение, анализы и другие обязательные условия указаны ниже в критериях участия.
Где проводится
Франция
Следующий шаг
Сохраните исследование, покажите его лечащему врачу и уточните актуальный статус у исследовательского центра. Расходы, документы и поездка →
Официальное название

Evaluation of Anthropological, Socio-cultural and Psychological Factors of Surgeons Practising in Oncology Which Condition Brakes in the Evaluation of Surgical Innovations

Обзор

The field of surgery continues to benefit from innovative solutions, changing surgical methods and techniques. Evaluation in terms of efficacy and Quality-Safety is an essential topic that directly affects the introduction of innovations. It is essential to carry out a robust evaluation strategy for surgical innovations, even if these are often opposed to drug innovations. The aim of this study is to investigate the anthropological, socio-cultural and psychological differences of surgeons that influence the evaluation of surgical innovations.

Подробное описание

RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS Over the past decade, the role of the surgeon in scientific research in oncology has evolved and many surgeons are involved in basic research activities alongside their clinical activities. Despite this increasing involvement in research, the issue of evaluation of surgical procedures remains a major concern. As an example, the French Society of Oncological Surgery programs at its annual congress a plenary session "Randomized trial: the grail in oncological surgery?". When the topic of clinical research is discussed, one of the first reactions is usually to point out the differences between research on new therapies and on surgical procedures. This persistent claim can be challenged. This claim may also be related to the major difference in regulation between therapeutics (MA) and medical devices (CE markings) which may not have encouraged surgeons to develop the culture of randomised evidence.

No study seems to evaluate the factors related to the surgeon influencing his involvement and participation in clinical research in oncological surgery. The aim of our study is to determine which anthropo-sociological factors in surgeons are associated with the obstacles to the evaluation of surgical innovations and influence their degree of participation in clinical research.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The main objective of this study is to evaluate the factors associated with the obstacles to the evaluation of surgical innovations.

The secondary objectives are :

* To identify the factors associated with involvement in clinical research on two levels : (i) Investigator coordinator, (ii) Investigator in a study. * To assess knowledge of complementary designs to the randomised trial. * To identify the parameters associated with 'knowledge' of the complementary regimens to the randomised trial.

STUDY DESIGN This is a prospective study conducted on a national scale in the form of a survey of surgeons working in cancerology. This project has obtained the support of UNICANCER (Federation of Cancer Centres), the French-speaking Society of Oncological Surgery (SFCO), the Head and Neck Tumour Study Group (GETTEC), the French Society of Cervico-facial Carcinology (SFCCF), French Society of Gynecology Oncology (SFOG), French Association of Digestive \& Visceral Surgery and the French Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. Their mailings will be used to disseminate the survey to surgeons in the area.

STUDY PROCESS

Phase 1: Questionnaire creation

The first part of the project will consist in the creation of the questionnaire. The questionnaire will include data related to the surgeon (non-exhaustive list):

* Demography: age, gender * Education : * Place and date of graduation from medical school, * Obtained DESC in oncology or European equivalent * Practice : * Speciality: senology, gynaecology,... * Main place of practice: CHU, CLCC, CHG, Private clinic, ESPIC outside CLCC, Other, * Number of treated patients per year. * Involvement in clinical research: * Accreditation to GCP Validated, * Number of trials as Coordinating Investigator / Principal Investigator, * Number of patients included in a clinical trial per year, * Member of a learned society or cooperative group,

Questions associated with barriers to conducting trials in surgery and alternative methodological approaches will be drafted.

Practitioners' attitudes towards risk and uncertainty will be assessed by the following tools:

1. Questions on willingness to take risk in general and in different areas (answers given on a scale of 0-10). 2. Questions on the willingness to engage in risky activities in different areas (answers given on a scale of 0-10). 3. Choice of lotteries : choice between 6 lotteries characterised by different payoffs and risk levels.

In order to check the feasibility, the online questionnaire will be evaluated by the steering committee. The steering committee will include members from the sponsoring centre but also external members who will not be involved in the creation of the questionnaire. Once the questionnaire has been developed, the regulatory steps will be taken.

Phase 2: Awareness raising In this type of study, one of the key points is the response to the questionnaires. In order to mobilise a maximum of surgeons, actions (presentation, Webinar) will be carried out with the different groups/companies that have agreed to participate in the projects.

Phase 3: Sending of questionnaires The questionnaires will be sent to the different surgeons via the Sphynx survey software. This software allows the distribution of dynamic and interactive questionnaires with a display adapted to different media (computer, tablet, smartphone, etc.).

STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY Number of participants needed In two previous studies with a similar methodology, a response rate with usable questionnaires of 17 to 30% was observed, corresponding to 200 and 230 questionnaires. With 200 usable questionnaires and assuming that for 50% of them, obstacles to the evaluation of surgical innovations are identified, it is possible to carry out a multivariable model with 12 parameters according to the rule of thumb of 10 events per variable.

Statistical analysis Demographic data will be described by the usual descriptive statistics. Categorical variables will be presented as follows: number of missing data, number and percentage for each modality of the variable. Quantitative data will be presented as follows: median, minimum, maximum, number of missing data.

Первичные конечные точки

  • Identification of the parameters associated with barriers to the evaluation of surgical innovations. [Срок оценки: 21 months]
Вторичные конечные точки (2)
  • Identification of the parameters associated with involvement in clinical research. [Срок оценки: 21 months]
  • Identification of the parameters associated with knowledge of complementary patterns. [Срок оценки: 21 months]

Критерии участия

Критерии включения

  • Surgeon practising oncology in France.
  • E-mail address accessible via one of the companies/cooperating groups that have agreed to participate in the project

Критерии исключения

  • None

Критерии приведены из реестра в оригинале (на английском). Окончательную оценку соответствия проводит исследовательский центр.

Здоровые добровольцы: Да

Дизайн исследования

Модель наблюдения
Когортное

Центры проведения

Франция · 1 центр
  • Institut Claudius Regaud — Toulouse

Публикации

  • Bories P, Lamy S, Simand C, Bertoli S, Delpierre C, Malak S, Fornecker L, Moreau S, Recher C, Nebout A. Physician uncertainty aversion impacts medical decision making for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia: results of a national survey. Haematologica. 2018 Dec;103(12):2040-2048. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.192468. Epub 2018 Jul 13. PMID 30006448
  • Brandberg Y, Malm M, Blomqvist L. A prospective and randomized study, "SVEA," comparing effects of three methods for delayed breast reconstruction on quality of life, patient-defined problem areas of life, and cosmetic result. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000 Jan;105(1):66-74; discussion 75-6. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200001000-00011. PMID 10626972
  • Castel P, Negrier S, Boissel JP; Plateforme d'Aide a la Recherche Clinique en Cancerologie de la region Rhone-Alpes. Why don't cancer patients enter clinical trials? A review. Eur J Cancer. 2006 Aug;42(12):1744-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.10.033. Epub 2006 Jun 14. PMID 16777404
  • Concato J, Peduzzi P, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. Importance of events per independent variable in proportional hazards analysis. I. Background, goals, and general strategy. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Dec;48(12):1495-501. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(95)00510-2. PMID 8543963
  • Cook JA. The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials. Trials. 2009 Feb 6;10:9. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-9. PMID 19200379
  • Crocker JC, Farrar N, Cook JA, Treweek S, Woolfall K, Chant A, Bostock J, Locock L, Rees S, Olszowski S, Bulbulia R. Recruitment and retention of participants in UK surgical trials: survey of key issues reported by trial staff. BJS Open. 2020 Oct 4;4(6):1238-45. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50345. Online ahead of print. PMID 33016008
  • Cros F, Lamy S, Grosclaude P, Nebout A, Chabrillac E, Vergez S, Bories P, Dupret-Bories A. Physician practice variation in head and neck cancer therapy: Results of a national survey. Oral Oncol. 2021 Jun;117:105293. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105293. Epub 2021 Apr 14. PMID 33862559
  • Elliott D, Hamdy FC, Leslie TA, Rosario D, Dudderidge T, Hindley R, Emberton M, Brewster S, Sooriakumaran P, Catto JWF, Emara A, Ahmed H, Whybrow P, le Conte S, Donovan JL. Overcoming difficulties with equipoise to enable recruitment to a randomised controlled trial of partial ablation vs radical prostatectomy for unilateral localised prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2018 Dec;122(6):970-977. doi: 10.1111 PMID 29888845

Идентификаторы

NCT: NCT05865964 · 22RD14

Первоисточники (государственные реестры)

Открыть это исследование на ClinicalTrials.gov ↗