The barriers to conduct of clinical research will require solutions if we are to implement evidence-based health care reform
Reforms in the funding of health services, such as “activity-based” funding initiatives, seek to facilitate changes in how health care is delivered, leading to greater efficiency while maintaining effectiveness. However, often these changes in treatment strategies and service provision evolve without evidence demonstrating effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes. The pressures on health care expenditure (currently around 9% of gross domestic product1) make such an approach untenable and unsustainable. The evidence necessary to support these initiatives can only be derived through carefully conducted clinical research. Most readers would immediately think of clinical trials in terms of pharmaceuticals or clinical devices, and this type of research is critically important, although continuing to decline, in Australia.2 Other questions relate to the effectiveness of changes in health practice or policy, usually (but not always) based on sensible ideas that seem self-evident. However, in order to function with an evidence base, these ideas need to be proven to be clinically effective and cost-effective. Such research can be costly, and many of the questions to be addressed are not ones that would be the subject of an industry-sponsored trial. Researchers, clinicians and health administrators are therefore faced with the problem of how best to measure the outcomes of changes to health care strategies, without the necessary resources to ask and answer the question.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health 2012. Canberra: AIHW, 2012. (AIHW Cat. No. AUS 156; Australia’s Health Series No 13.)
- 2. Medicines Australia. How to save Australia’s declining clinical trials — 18 Feb 2011 [media release]. http://medicinesaustralia.com.au/2011/02/18/how-to-save-australias-declining-clinical-trials (accessed Jan 2013).
- 3. National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian Research Council; Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. National statement on ethical conduct in human research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2007.
- 4. National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian Research Council; Universities Australia. Australian code for the responsible conduct of research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2007.
- 5. National Health and Medical Research Council. Research governance handbook: guidance for the national approach to single ethical review. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2011.
- 6. National Health and Medical Research Council. Framework for monitoring: guidance for the national approach to single ethical review of multi-centre research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2012.
- 7. National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. A healthier future for all Australians. Final report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. June 2009. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2009.
Ian Davis is an NHMRC Practitioner Fellow and is Chair of the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group Ltd.