Critically discuss why a clinical trial protocol is essential in clinical trials - Essay Example

Standard Clinical Trial Protocol College: Standard Clinical Trial Protocol The essence of a standard clinical trial protocol in clinical trial is a topic that has attracted a big controversy. A clinical trial protocol refers to the procedure that all clinicians must follow while conducting a clinical test. While some authors argue that clinical trial protocol is a quality measure and that it ensures that there is consistency in results, others feel that the occasional amendment of such protocol shows the subjective nature of such protocols.

However, there is a point of concession that standardizing clinical trial procedures ensures that tests are conducted in uniform and expertly manner. Therefore, clinical trial protocols are crucial tools that contribute to efficiency in clinical trials. One argument that supports clinical trial protocols is that it allows for quality of service within the area of clinical practice. Since clinical trial protocols are expertly prepared, they provide guidance on how tests should be conducted. Additionally, protocols provide safety precautions details that help professional from suffering from any damages (Chow & Liu, 2014).

For instance, a person testing a dangerous gas is required to have a mask and safety goggles to ensure that they do not come to any harm. Therefore, such protocols eliminate negligence which could as much as life of patients or staff. Lack of standard protocols would lead to subjectivity as various staffs use different approaches to conduct trial (Wang & Bakhai, 2006). On this ground, protocols are quality and safety assurance tools that cannot be neglected within clinical professional practice.

Secondly, a standard trial protocol simplifies the work of researchers especially when trial is long and requires a collaborative approach. Since the protocols are well arrange from one stage to the next, it is possible for different groups in a multi-center to pick various sections of the trial and implement them independently (Bradburn et al., 2010). This makes work easier without introducing errors within the trial. Since each group works on particular portions, it is clear that their results can be well combined with those of other centers to come up with a conclusive trial.

This is something that would rather be difficult if there was not standard procedure for conducting clinical trials.However, the opponent of clinical trial protocols note that trials are subject to the opinions of the person conduction them, and hence protocols do not assure that there is quality. Reading the results is subject to a person’s view, which may vary from one person to the other (Chan, 2008). For instance, color blind people can provide faulty results different from those given by a normal observer.

Additionally, clinical trial protocols require constant amendments to ascertain accuracy. Others argue that such protocols kill innovation incentives that would promote healthcare. A counter argument to point stated by the proponents is that lack of standard procedures would introduce more subjective as different people use different approaches to conduct the trials.In conclusion, standard clinical trial protocols are crucial tools to improve quality and simplify the test research procedures.

They provide an opportunity for researchers to come up with consistent results and promote safety within the clinical field. While there is evidence that observation of trial results may suffer from objectivity, ignoring standard procedures would result to lack of consistency and may jeopardize the quality of trial conducted in the laboratories. Therefore, clinicians should strive to standardize clinical trial procedures as much as possible to ensure that issues of quality and consistency are ascertained.

ReferencesBradburn, J., Maher, J., Adewuyi‐Dalton, R., Grunfeld, E., Lancaster, T., & Mant, D. (2010). Developing clinical trial protocols: the use of patient focus groups. Psycho‐oncology, 4(2), 107-112.Chan, A. W. (2008). Bias, spin, and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Medicine, 5(11), e230.Chow, S.-C., & Liu, J. (2014). Design and analysis of clinical trials: Concepts and methodologies. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.Wang, D., & Bakhai, A. (2006). Clinical trials: A practical guide to design, analysis, and reporting.

London: Remedica.