L Jonker1, S J Fisher2. 1. Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Research & Development Department, Carlisle, CA1 3SX, UK; University of Cumbria, Carlisle, CA1 2HH, UK. Electronic address: leon.jonker@cumbria.nhs.uk. 2. Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Research & Development Department, Carlisle, CA1 3SX, UK. Electronic address: stacey.fisher@cumbria.nhs.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Evidence supporting the notion that clinical research activity in itself is of benefit to organisations as a whole is inconclusive. In the recent past, a positive association between research activity and reduced mortality has been shown. This study aimed to ascertain if clinical research activity is associated with established organisational outcome measures. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: For 129 English National Health Service hospital Trusts, National Institute for Health Research study activity data, Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator (SHMI) scores and Care Quality Commission (CQC) ratings were collected. Research activity was controlled for Trust size by dividing it by clinical staffing levels. Multiple linear regression and Spearman correlation analyses were performed. RESULTS: Although there is a significant association between the number of studies and participants with both SHMI score and CQC rating, one particular variable is correlated more significantly than others: the number of participants recruited into interventional studies. It shows a significant correlation with better CQC ratings (standardised coefficient beta 0.26, P-value 0.003) and lower SHMI scores (standardised coefficient beta -0.50, P-value 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality-related results corroborate with other published data showing a correlation between increased research and reduced deaths. Furthermore, there is also a statistically significant association between clinical trials activity and improved CQC ratings. However, these tie-ins are predominantly driven by the number of participants in interventional research rather than observational research activity.
OBJECTIVES: Evidence supporting the notion that clinical research activity in itself is of benefit to organisations as a whole is inconclusive. In the recent past, a positive association between research activity and reduced mortality has been shown. This study aimed to ascertain if clinical research activity is associated with established organisational outcome measures. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: For 129 English National Health Service hospital Trusts, National Institute for Health Research study activity data, Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator (SHMI) scores and Care Quality Commission (CQC) ratings were collected. Research activity was controlled for Trust size by dividing it by clinical staffing levels. Multiple linear regression and Spearman correlation analyses were performed. RESULTS: Although there is a significant association between the number of studies and participants with both SHMI score and CQC rating, one particular variable is correlated more significantly than others: the number of participants recruited into interventional studies. It shows a significant correlation with better CQC ratings (standardised coefficient beta 0.26, P-value 0.003) and lower SHMI scores (standardised coefficient beta -0.50, P-value 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality-related results corroborate with other published data showing a correlation between increased research and reduced deaths. Furthermore, there is also a statistically significant association between clinical trials activity and improved CQC ratings. However, these tie-ins are predominantly driven by the number of participants in interventional research rather than observational research activity.
Keywords:
Care Quality Commission; Clinical trials; Interventional research; National Health Service; National Institute for Health Research; Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator
Authors: Phillip Lr Nicolson; Michael Jr Desborough; Daniel Hart; Tina T Biss; Gillian C Lowe; Cheng-Hock Toh Journal: Clin Med (Lond) Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 2.659
Authors: Lisa Newington; Mary Wells; Adine Adonis; Lee Bolton; Layla Bolton Saghdaoui; Margaret Coffey; Jennifer Crow; Olga Fadeeva Costa; Catherine Hughes; Matthew Savage; Lillie Shahabi; Caroline M Alexander Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-04-29 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Christine Comer; Richard Collings; Alison McCracken; Carol Payne; Ann Moore Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-08-27 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: Lydia Wilson; Andrew J Doyle; Emily Millen; Tom Bull; Tina Biss; Dan Hart; Gillian Lowe; Cheng-Hock Toh; Richard J Buka; Phillip L R Nicolson Journal: Hemasphere Date: 2022-08-10
Authors: Paulina Stehlik; Christy Noble; Caitlin Brandenburg; Peter Fawzy; Isaac Narouz; David Henry; Paul Glasziou Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-03-15 Impact factor: 2.692