Steve Sanghera, Chief Executive Officer at Inventus, explores how purpose-built technology can improve patient retention, data quality and reliability in decentralised clinical trials.
Decentralised clinical trials are no longer an aspiration; they exist and are part of our industry norm. The real challenge now is whether the technology supporting decentralised trials is fit for the realities of clinical trials.
Too often this is just not the case. Many trials still rely on consumer devices with sponsors still choosing to buy off-the-shelf smartphones – devices originally designed for everyday life – not for patients taking part in complex and highly regulated studies.
If decentralised trials are to improve retention, widen access and deliver reliable data at scale, the technology behind them must be purpose-built from the start. With an estimated 25–30% of participants likely to drop out of clinical trials, every point of friction counts. A device that fails, a connection that drops, a confusing interface or a support process that sends patients between multiple vendors can all become reasons for them to disengage.
There is a better way. As the CEO of Inventus, I know that if we design technology bespoke to clinical trials and patient experiences, we can tackle the retention challenge head-on. That means treating bespoke devices, connectivity, support and data management as one joined-up proposition, not separate workstreams that are expected to hold together under pressure.
Consumer technology creates friction for clinical trials
The Covid-19 pandemic showed what is possible when trials go digital and care extends into patients’ homes. But making that model sustainable and dependable at scale requires technology built for clinical research, not consumer devices used in everyday life.
That distinction is important. Consumer smartphones and tablets are built for broad, short-cycle use. They are updated frequently, replaced often and designed around general convenience rather than the specific demands of regulated, multi-year clinical studies. In a trial setting, those limitations can quickly create friction for patients and risk for sponsors.
I have seen too many solutions that look impressive on paper but fail in practice because they rely on consumer technology that does not account for real people, real routines and real interruptions. They also fail because the device experience and the data experience are treated as different problems, when patients experience them as one journey.
Any technology used in clinical trials must be intuitive and easy to troubleshoot. In multi-year studies, practicality is what keeps people in. (Swappable batteries) – Carefully thought-out patient-centric designed dedicated devices, reliable connectivity can be the difference between a participant staying engaged and quietly dropping out. That connectivity cannot be left to chance or manual configuration – it needs to work seamlessly across geographies from day one, whether a patient is at home in one country or travelling across borders. The same is true of device oversight. If approved applications are not deployed correctly, settings are not locked down and updates are not controlled, data can be captured in the wrong way and patients can lose trust. If data capture, transmission and oversight are not built into the service from the outset, friction shows up fast.
Patient experience does ultimately determine trial quality
Done well, decentralised clinical trials can invite more diverse populations and improve data quality. If a participant can complete a routine check-in at home or record symptoms in minutes on their device, the trial fits around their life. This is especially important as nearly half of trial participants say travelling to study sites is somewhat or very burdensome, while 40% say the same about the length of study visits.
Again, whether that works in practice depends entirely on the technology supporting it – and consumer devices were never designed with that reliability in mind.
We know that when a software issue stops devices from seamlessly working, or a device loses connectivity, or a problem cannot be resolved quickly, patients can disengage. In clinical trials, these seemingly small points of friction are not just usability issues. They can affect retention, reduce data quality and ultimately weaken the reliability of the evidence collected.
In decentralised trials, where patients are often expected to manage technology outside a clinical setting, help needs to be readily accessible, but it also needs to be designed around real patient needs. That means creating support models for people with low digital confidence, disabilities or limited language proficiency. When the patient experience works, participation becomes easier, retention improves, data collection is cleaner and trials become more inclusive.
A single point of support is essential. If a patient’s device loses connectivity, the fix should be simple and, if the issue needs to be escalated, they should not face multiple vendors. When hardware, connectivity, device management and data management are designed and delivered together, issues can be resolved and get patients back on track within hours, not days. That is why seamless connectivity that is purpose-built and able to operate across countries, and dedicated device management platforms that let sponsors to remotely configure, monitor and secure trial devices are so important.
Many providers can offer one part of the answer. Some provide bespoke devices. Others focus on data solutions. Very few deliver a truly end-to-end service that connects patient-facing technology, operational support and data management in one joined-up system.
What the future looks like
Progress could stall if the industry continues delivering trials with the wrong tools. Consumer devices create predictable problems – forced software updates that were not tested for trial protocols, parts that cannot be easily replaced, regional limitations, interfaces designed for everyday life rather than clinical participation and planned obsolescence that makes multi-year studies harder to manage.
The gap the industry now needs to close is between the pace of technology and the pace of adoption. AI, digital health platforms, remote monitoring and advanced analytics are already changing what is possible. The harder task is bringing that progress into clinical trials without weakening trust, compliance or data integrity.
Over the next five to ten years, I expect the industry to move away from patchwork systems and towards integrated trial models, where devices, connectivity, support, data management and telehealth are built into protocols from the outset. In 15 years, pharma should feel far closer to everyday life with research and care happening around people rather than asking people to fit around systems. In 50 years, medicine may be shaped far more by prevention and prediction than by waiting for illness to appear.
That shift will ask more of the companies supporting trials. It will require operational discipline at scale, stronger digital health infrastructure and longer-term partnerships between sponsors, technology providers and healthcare organisations. The future will belong to those who can combine innovation with dependable execution, rethink old trial models, and still hold the line on quality, trust and patient experience. Purpose-built technology is how decentralised trials move from useful alternative to everyday clinical reality.
