Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:25:58.784Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accrual of Patients to Randomized Clinical Trials: Factors Affecting Cancer Prevention and Control Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Arnold D. Kaluzny ,
Linda M. Lacey ,
Richard Warnecke ,
Joseph P. Morrissey ,
Edward J. Sondik  and
Leslie Ford
Arnold D. Kaluzny
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Linda M. Lacey
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Richard Warnecke
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Chicago
Joseph P. Morrissey
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Edward J. Sondik
Affiliation:
U.S. National Cancer Institute
Leslie Ford
Affiliation:
U.S. National Cancer Institute
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Clinical judgment is increasingly being challenged by the need for randomized clinical trials. The 1987 National Cancer Institute mandate—that the Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP) accrue patients to cancer control protocols—provided an opportunity to examine the factors that affect accrual performance. An analysis of 52 CCOPs and their research bases participating in the program found that the availability of protocols, involvement with research base activities, a demonstrated link to community physicians (particularly those physicians, such as surgeons, who had access to patients), and the use of personal contacts to inform non-CCOP physicians about CCOP activities were important facilitating factors for accruing patients to cancer prevention and control trials.

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , Summer 1994 , pp. 506 - 516
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Feigl, P., Patmont, C., Rodenbaugh, J., et al. Community Cancer Care Evaluation (CCCE) final report, volume 5: Integrated analysis. Seattle, WA: Statistical Analysis and Quality Control Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1987.Google Scholar
2.Fennell, M. L., & Warnecke, R. B.The diffusion of medical innovations: An applied network analysis. New York: Plenum Press, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Ford, L., Kaluzny, A., & Sondik, E.Diffusion and adoption of state-of-the-art therapy. Seminars in Oncology, 1990, 17, 485–94.Google ScholarPubMed
4.Freund, R. J., & Littell, R. C.SAS system for regression. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1986.Google Scholar
5.Greer, A. L.The state of the art versus the state of the science: The diffusion of new medical technologies into practice. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1990, 4, 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Kaluzny, A. D., & Hernandez, S. R. Organizational change and innovation. In Shortell, S. M., Kaluzny, A. D., et al. (eds.), Health care management: A text in organization theory and behavior, 2nd'ed.New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1988, 379–417.Google Scholar
7.Kaluzny, A. D., Lacey, L., Warnecke, R., et al. Predicting the performance of a strategic alliance: An analysis of the Community Clinical Oncology Program. Health Services Research, 1993, 28, 159–82.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Kaluzny, A. D., Lacey, L., Warnecke, R., et al. Cancer prevention and control within the National Cancer Institute's Clinical Trials Network: Lessons from the Community Clinical Oncology Program. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1993, 85, 1807–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Kaluzny, A. D., Ricketts, T. Ill, Warnecke, R., et al. Evaluating organizational design to assure technology transfer: The case of the Community Clinical Oncology Program. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1989, 81, 1717–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Kaluzny, A. D., Warnecke, R., & Gillings, D.Assessment of the implementation and impact of the Community Clinical Oncology Program — Phase II: Final report. Chapel Hill, NC: Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Reseach, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1992.Google Scholar
11.Lacey, L. M., Hynes, D., & Kaluzny, A. D.Performance in quasi firms: An example from the Community Clinical Oncology Program. Journal of Health and Human Resources Administration, 1992, 14, 307–26.Google ScholarPubMed
12.McKinney, M., Barnsley, J. M., & Kaluzny, A.Organizing for cancer control: The diffusion of a dynamic innovation in a community cancer network. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1992, 8, 268–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.McKinney, M., Morrissey, J., & Kaluzny, A.Interorganizational exchanges as performance markers in a community cancer network. Health Services Research, 1993, 28, 459–89.Google Scholar
14.National Cancer Institute. Request for Cooperation Agreement Application: Community Clinical Oncology Program. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 1982.Google Scholar
15.Ricketts, T. C. III, & Kaluzny, A. D.Innovation within innovation: A paradox for cancer control research. Family and Community Health, 1989, 12, 54–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Rogers, E. M.Diffusion of innovations, 3rd ed.New York: Free Press, 1983.Google Scholar
17.Thomas, J. B., Ketchen, D., Trevino, L., & McDaniel, R.Developing interorganizational relationships in the health sector: A multicase study. Health Care Management Review, 1992, 17, 7–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Zuckerman, H. S., & Kaluzny, A. D.Strategic alliances in health care: The challenges of cooperation. Frontiers of Healthcare Management, 1991, 7, 3–23.Google ScholarPubMed