Effects on patients of their healthcare practitioner's or institution's participation in clinical trials: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Systematic reviews have shown uncertainty about the size or direction of any 'trial effect' for patients in trials compared to those treated outside trials. We are not aware of any systematic review of whether there is a 'trial effect' related to being treated by healthcare practitioners or institutions that take part in research.


METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register and MEDLINE (most recently in January 2009) for studies in which patients were allocated to treatment in one or other setting, and cohort studies reporting the outcomes of patients from different settings. We independently assessed study quality, including the control of bias in the generation of the comparison groups, and extracted data.


RESULTS
We retrieved and checked more than 15,000 records. Thirteen articles were eligible: five practitioner studies and eight institution studies. Meta-analyses were not possible because of heterogeneity. Two practitioner studies were judged to be 'controlled' or better. A Canadian study among nurses found that use of research evidence was higher for those who took part in research working groups and a Danish study on general practitioners found that trial doctors were more likely to prescribe in accordance with research evidence and guidelines. Five institution studies were 'controlled' but provided mixed results. A study of North American patients at hospitals that had taken part in trials for myocardial infarction found no statistically significant difference in treatment for patients in trial and non-trial hospitals. A Canadian study of myocardial infarction patients found that trial participants had better survival than patients in the same hospitals who were not in trials or those in non-trial hospitals. A study of general practices in Denmark did not detect differences in guideline adherence between trial and non-trial practices but found that trial practices were more likely to prescribe the trial sponsor's drugs. The other two 'controlled' studies of institutions found lower mortality in trial than non-trial hospitals.


CONCLUSIONS
The available findings from existing research suggest that there might be a 'trial effect' of better outcomes, greater adherence to guidelines and more use of evidence by practitioners and institutions that take part in trials. However, the consequences for patient health are uncertain and the most robust conclusion may be that there is no apparent evidence that patients treated by practitioners or in institutions that take part in trials do worse than those treated elsewhere.
UK Cochrane Centre, National Institute for Health Research, Middle Way, Oxford, OX2 7LG, UK. mclarke@cochrane.ac.uk
Mike
M
Clarke
Kirsty
K
Loudon
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D058005:General Practitioners / Q000523:psychology*; D019983:Guideline Adherence; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006761:Hospitals; D006801:Humans; D008505:Medical Staff, Hospital / Q000523:psychology*; D009722:Nurse Practitioners / Q000523:psychology*; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians'; D018570:Risk Assessment; D016896:Treatment Outcome
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 May;27(6):1335-42
8626941
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Mar 24;168(6):657-62
18362259
Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(27):iii-x, 1-173
14499048
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):MR000006
19160345
J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Mar;54(3):217-24
11223318
Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 May;103(5):1079-89
18445097
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16;(3):MR000009
18677782
Trials. 2010 May 12;11:52
20462436
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Oct 1;24(7):1117-25
16984506
JAMA. 2006 Jun 21;295(23):2759-64
16788131
Lancet. 2004 Jan 24;363(9405):263-70
14751698
Lancet. 2010 Jul 3;376(9734):20-1
20609983
J Epidemiol Community Health (1978). 1978 Jun;32(2):143-6
681588
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005 Mar-Apr;15(2):183-91
15823098
Anticancer Res. 2006 Sep-Oct;26(5B):3661-7
17094382
Am Heart J. 1999 Jan;137(1):79-92
9878939
Can J Nurs Leadersh. 2002 Jan-Feb;15(1):18-26
11908539
JAMA. 2003 Sep 10;290(10):1351-5
12966127
Am J Med. 2002 Aug 1;113(2):140-5
12141320
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Dec;135(6):831-7
17141069