Oversight of quality improvement - Focusing on benefits and risks

被引:30
作者
Lo, B
Groman, M
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Program Med Eth, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Div Gen Internal Med, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1001/archinte.163.12.1481
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Quality improvement (QI) may substantially improve patient outcomes while posing little risk to subjects. However, the term quality improvement is used to refer to a broad range of projects, which vary widely in the potential benefits and risks to participants. Some projects raise ethical concerns. An explicit protocol for the ethical review of QI would benefit both patients and leaders of QI projects. If a project is considered research rather than QI, review by an institutional review board and informed consent from subjects may be required. In contrast, QI projects may require little oversight beyond what is already in place for clinical care. However, a monolithic approach to oversight of QI is inappropriate in light of the variation in benefits and risks of QI projects and their overlap with research. The key ethical issue is not the classification of a project as QI or research, but the balance of anticipated benefits and harms in the project. We propose a protocol for independent review of QI projects and patient consent that will protect subjects from serious harm while encouraging QI projects that will substantially benefit participants and pose only minimal risk.
引用
收藏
页码:1481 / 1486
页数:6
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] *ADV COMM HUM RAD, 1995, ADV COMM HUM RAD EXP
  • [2] The quality improvement-research divide and the need for external oversight
    Bellin, E
    Dubler, NN
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2001, 91 (09) : 1512 - 1517
  • [3] Developing and testing changes in delivery of care
    Berwick, DM
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1998, 128 (08) : 651 - 656
  • [4] Determining when quality improvement initiatives should be considered research - Proposed criteria and potential implications
    Casarett, D
    Karlawish, JHT
    Sugarman, J
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (17): : 2275 - 2280
  • [5] The line between research and audit
    Choo, V
    [J]. LANCET, 1998, 352 (9125) : 337 - 338
  • [6] *IS MED COMM ROL I, 2000, PROT DAT PRIV HLTH S
  • [7] *NAT BIOETH ADV CO, 1998, RES INV PERS MENT DI
  • [8] *NAT BIOETH ADV CO, 2001, ETH POL ISS RES INV, P21
  • [9] UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy 21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal-translucency thickness at 10-14 weeks of gestation
    Snijders, RJM
    Noble, P
    Sebire, N
    Souka, A
    Nicolaides, KH
    [J]. LANCET, 1998, 352 (9125) : 343 - 346
  • [10] Is informed consent always necessary for randomized, controlled trials?
    Truog, RD
    Robinson, W
    Randolph, A
    Morris, A
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1999, 340 (10) : 804 - 807