Evaluación ética de la memoria económica de los contratos de ensayos clínicos con medicamentos en España

Objetivos: Analizar el grado de homogeneidad de la memoria económica incluida en los contratos de centros sanitarios españoles participantes en ensayos clínicos (EC) con medicamentos para detectar puntos de potencial conflicto de interés en la investigación clínica. Material y métodos: Se ha analizado, mediante un autocuestionario, la memoria económica de 40 contratos, 31 correspondientes a centros sanitarios privados y públicos seleccionados al azar y 9 correspondientes a las comunidades autónomas con modelo de contrato único. Resultados: El equipo investigador, en el 97,5% de los casos (39 contratos), es el destinatario mayoritario de la remuneración económica por participar en un EC. El porcentaje aportado difiere según el centro, siendo mayor si es público (p=0,021) pero sin especificarse en el 50% de los contratos. En 38 de los 40 contratos analizados no se proporciona un listado de precios de las pruebas complementarias. En el 57,5%, (23 contratos), no se especifica si los gastos de los pacientes son abonados por el promotor. En el 77,5% (31 casos) no se especifica si los gastos derivados de reuniones relacionadas con el EC se incluyen en la memoria económica. Conclusiones: Existe una elevada heterogeneidad en el contenido de la memoria económica. La implantación de un modelo de memoria económica que incluyera una cantidad económica de remuneración fija por cada paciente reclutado por parte del promotor, para todos los centros participantes, podría disminuir las desigualdades entre centros, los conflictos de intereses, y además, incrementaría la trasparencia y la calidad de los EC.Abstract: Objectives: To analyze the homogeneity of the economic report of the contracts of Spanish medical centers participating in clinical trials with medicinal products for detecting points of potential conflict of interest in clinical research. Material and methods: We analyzed, through a selfautoquestionnaire, the budgetary information of the 40 contracts, 31 of them corresponding to public and private healthcare centers, randomly selected, and 9 corresponding to the Spanish regions who have only a model contract. Results: The investigator team is the recipient majority (97.5% of cases) the economic remuneration for participating in a clinical trial. The percentage differs according to the center considered, being greater in the public setting (p=0.021) but no specified in 50% of the contracts. In 38 of the 40 contracts analyzed a price list of tests is not provided. In 57.5% of the patients are paid by the promoter. In 17.5% failed to mention that the comparative drug to be supplied free of charge. And, 77.5% did not specify whether the costs of meetings relating to the clinical trial or not to include in the expenses of the promoter. Conclusions: There is a high heterogeneity in the content of the budgetary information. The implementation of a single contract model would reduce the inequalities between schools, conflict of interest and increase transparency and quality of the clinical trial

A comparison of welfare outcomes for weaner and mature Bos indicus bulls surgically or tension band castrated with or without analgesia: 1. Behavioural responses

Tension-band castration of cattle is gaining favour because it is relatively simple to perform and is promoted by retailers of the devices as a humane castration method. Furthermore, retailers encourage delaying castration to exploit the superior growth rates of bulls compared with steers. Two experiments were conducted, under tropical conditions, comparing tension banding and surgical castration of weaner (7-10 months old) and mature (22-25 months old) Bos indicus bulls with and without pain management (ketoprofen or saline injected intramuscularly immediately prior to castration). Welfare outcomes were assessed using a wide range of measures; this paper reports on the behavioural responses of the bulls and an accompanying paper reports on other measures. Behavioural data were collected at intervals by direct observation and continuously via data loggers on the hind leg of the bulls to 4 weeks post-castration. Tension-banded bulls performed less movement in the crush/chute than the surgically castrated bulls during the procedures (weaner: 2.63 vs. 5.69,

Expert opinion as 'validation' of risk assessment applied to calf welfare

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recently, a Risk Assessment methodology was applied to animal welfare issues in a report of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on intensively housed calves.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Because this is a new and potentially influential approach to derive conclusions on animal welfare issues, a so-called semantic-modelling type 'validation' study was conducted by asking expert scientists, who had been involved or quoted in the report, to give welfare scores for housing systems and for welfare hazards.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Kendall's coefficient of concordance among experts (n = 24) was highly significant (P < 0.001), but low (0.29 and 0.18 for housing systems and hazards respectively). Overall correlations with EFSA scores were significant only for experts with a veterinary or mixed (veterinary and applied ethological) background. Significant differences in welfare scores were found between housing systems, between hazards, and between experts with different backgrounds. For example, veterinarians gave higher overall welfare scores for housing systems than ethologists did, probably reflecting a difference in their perception of animal welfare.</p> <p>Systems with the lowest scores were veal calves kept individually in so-called "baby boxes" (veal crates) or in small groups, and feedlots. A suckler herd on pasture was rated as the best for calf welfare. The main hazards were related to underfeeding, inadequate colostrum intake, poor stockperson education, insufficient space, inadequate roughage, iron deficiency, inadequate ventilation, poor floor conditions and no bedding. Points for improvement of the Risk Assessment applied to animal welfare include linking information, reporting uncertainty and transparency about underlying values.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study provides novel information on expert opinion in relation to calf welfare and shows that Risk Assessment applied to animal welfare can benefit from a semantic modelling approach.</p