Defining clinical trial quality from the perspective of resource-limited settings: A qualitative study based on interviews with investigators, sponsors, and monitors conducting clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa

BackgroundIncreasing clinical trial cost and complexity, as well as a high waste of clinical trial investment over the past decades, have changed the way clinical trial quality is managed. Recent evidence has highlighted that the lack of a clear clinical trial quality definition may have contributed to previous inefficiencies. This study aims to support the understanding of what clinical trial quality entails from the perspective of resource-limited settings. Methodology/Principal findingsWe conducted 46 semi-structured interviews involving investigators, sponsors, and monitors with experience in conducting clinical trials in 27 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The questionnaire addressed the overall meaning of clinical trial quality and a conclusive clinical trial quality definition, as well as specific aspects of resource-limited settings across the clinical trial process. We held the interviews either in person, via Skype or by phone. They were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and we performed the analysis using The Framework Method. The analysis of clinical trial quality definitions resulted in 11 elements, which were summarised into a clinical trial quality concept consisting of two components: 1) clinical trial quality building factors (Scientific factors and Moral factors) and 2) promoting factors (Context adaptation; Infrastructure; Partnership; Operational excellence; Quality system). 12 resource-limited settings specific themes were identified. These themes were all categorised under the promoting factors "Context adaptation", "Infrastructure", and "Partnership". Conclusions/SignificanceWe found that in order to enable comprehensive clinical trial quality management, clinical trial quality should be defined by a multidimensional concept that includes not only scientific and ethical, but also quality-promoting factors. Such a concept is of general relevance and not limited to clinical trials in resource-limited settings, where it naturally carries particular weight. In addition, from the perspective of sub-Saharan Africa, we identified specific categories that appear to be critical for the conduct of clinical trials in resource-limited settings, and we propose respective changes to a particular existing clinical trial quality framework (i.e., INQUIRE). Author summaryIn recent decades, the quality management of clinical trials has been criticised for being inefficient and ineffective. This has led to a waste of clinical trial investment and has made it particularly difficult to conduct clinical trials in settings with limited resources. The lack of a universally accepted comprehensive definition of clinical trial quality was suggested as one of the possible causes of inadequate quality management. However, resource-limited countries were not considered in the attempt to create such a definition. In our study, we developed a quality concept based on qualitative interviews from the perspective of investigators, sponsors, and monitors with experience in conducting clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa. The analysis of these stakeholders' definitions of clinical trial quality has produced a Clinical Trial Quality Concept that includes quality promoting factors (i.e., Context adaptation; Infrastructure; Partnership; Operational excellence; Quality system) in addition to conventional scientific and ethical factors. The results thus support the need for a multidimensional quality concept to reflect clinical trial quality more comprehensively. We recommend the term "Comprehensive Quality Management (CQM)" for this concept. CQM has the potential to serve as a basis for the current revision of quality management principles in international clinical trial guidelines. Furthermore, the sub-Saharan African perspective has highlighted additional considerations compared to the existing comprehensive INQUIRE clinical trial quality framework. Therefore, we propose including the following three points relevant to resource-limited settings in the framework: 1) Communicating potential infrastructural disadvantages to funders, sponsors, and auditors. 2) Preventing potential exploitation of research populations and workforce in low- and middle-income countries by following existing ethical frameworks. 3) Including "Context adaptation" as an additional framework category (i.e., promoting factor).