Marjorie J Good1, Barbara Lubejko, Keisha Humphries, Andrea Medders. 1. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Oncology Nursing Society, Pittsburgh, PA; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; and McKesson Specialty Health, The Woodlands, TX.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The ability to quantify clinical trial-associated workload can have a significant impact on the efficiency and success of a research organization. However, methods to effectively estimate the number of research staff needed for clinical trial recruitment, maintenance, compliance, and follow-up are lacking. To address this need, the Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program (WCCOP) developed and implemented an acuity-based workload assessment tool to facilitate assessment and balancing of workload among its research nursing staff. METHODS: An acuity-based measurement tool was developed, assigning acuity scores for individual clinical trials using six trial-related determinants. Using trial acuity scores and numbers of patients per trial, acuity scores for individual research nursing staff were then calculated and compared on a monthly basis. RESULTS: During the 11 years that data were collected, acuity scores increased from 65% to 181%. However, during this same period, WCCOP was able to decrease individual research nurse staff full-time equivalent (FTE) acuity scores and number of patients per FTE. These trends reflect the use of the acuity-based measurement tool to determine actual workload and use of the acuity data to direct hiring decisions. CONCLUSION: Clinical trial workload has been successfully measured and used to guide staffing by one community clinical oncology program. Further research is needed regarding its applicability to other research programs.
PURPOSE: The ability to quantify clinical trial-associated workload can have a significant impact on the efficiency and success of a research organization. However, methods to effectively estimate the number of research staff needed for clinical trial recruitment, maintenance, compliance, and follow-up are lacking. To address this need, the Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program (WCCOP) developed and implemented an acuity-based workload assessment tool to facilitate assessment and balancing of workload among its research nursing staff. METHODS: An acuity-based measurement tool was developed, assigning acuity scores for individual clinical trials using six trial-related determinants. Using trial acuity scores and numbers of patients per trial, acuity scores for individual research nursing staff were then calculated and compared on a monthly basis. RESULTS: During the 11 years that data were collected, acuity scores increased from 65% to 181%. However, during this same period, WCCOP was able to decrease individual research nurse staff full-time equivalent (FTE) acuity scores and number of patients per FTE. These trends reflect the use of the acuity-based measurement tool to determine actual workload and use of the acuity data to direct hiring decisions. CONCLUSION: Clinical trial workload has been successfully measured and used to guide staffing by one community clinical oncology program. Further research is needed regarding its applicability to other research programs.
Authors: Eileen P Dimond; Robin T Zon; Bryan J Weiner; Diane St Germain; Andrea M Denicoff; Kandie Dempsey; Angela C Carrigan; Randall W Teal; Marjorie J Good; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Stephen S Grubbs; Eileen P Dimond; Robin T Zon; Bryan J Weiner; Diane St Germain; Andrea M Denicoff; Kandie Dempsey; Angela C Carrigan; Randall W Teal; Marjorie J Good; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Stephen S Grubbs Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Andrea M Denicoff; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Stephen S Grubbs; Suanna S Bruinooge; Robert L Comis; Peggy Devine; David M Dilts; Michelle E Duff; Jean G Ford; Steven Joffe; Lidia Schapira; Kevin P Weinfurt; Margo Michaels; Derek Raghavan; Ellen S Richmond; Robin Zon; Terrance L Albrecht; Michael A Bookman; Afshin Dowlati; Rebecca A Enos; Mona N Fouad; Marjorie Good; William J Hicks; Patrick J Loehrer; Alan P Lyss; Steven N Wolff; Debra M Wujcik; Neal J Meropol Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Lowell Anthony; George Atweh; Ravi Bhatia; Lisa A Carey; Jenny C Chang; Martin J Edelman; Philip W Kantoff; Merry Jennifer Markham; Wells Messersmith; Edward L Nelson; Kurt Oettel; Ruth O'Regan; Claire F Verschraegen; Julie M Vose Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-09-30
Authors: Rosa M Jimenez-Rodriguez; Guillermo Martín-Gutiérrez; Silvia Jiménez-Jorge; Clara M Rosso-Fernández; Luis Tallón-Aguilar; Cristina Roca-Oporto; Javier Padillo; Alison Luckey; Angela Cano; José López-Ruiz; Silvia Gómez-Zorrilla; Jaime Bonnín-Pascual; Lucía Boix-Palop; José Miguel Montejo; Julian Torre-Cisneros; José Miguel Cisneros Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 2.692