Variation in Institutional Review processes for a multisite observational study

被引:43
作者
Vick, CC
Finan, KR
Kiefe, C
Neumayer, L
Hawn, MT [1 ]
机构
[1] Birmingham Vet Adm Med Ctr, Deep S Ctr Effectiveness, Birmingham, AL USA
[2] Univ Alabama, Dept Surg, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
[3] Univ Alabama, Dept Prevent Med, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
[4] Salt Lake City Vet Adm, Hlth Care Syst, Dept Surg, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[5] Univ Utah, Dept Surg, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 USA
关键词
informed consent; Institutional Review Board; multisite; observational; processes; variation;
D O I
10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.07.024
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The Veterans Administration is an ideal setting for multisite studies; however, individual VA Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is necessary. This study examines the burden of multisite IRB approval on a Health Services Research and Development (HSRD) ventral hernia outcomes observational study. Methods: Data gathered on the IRB process per site included time required for application completion, staff training and compliance, IRB affiliation (VA or university), approval status, and time to IRB approval. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to determine differences in median times for application completion and approval. Financial and temporal expenses were calculated. Results: Significant differences were found in median time to complete applications by IRB affiliation (P <.01) and median time to approval by changes required to the consent letter (P <.05). Conclusions: The IRB process for a multisite observational study is expensive in both time and money. A VA national IRB for multisite studies would significantly decrease the financial and temporal burden for observational Studies. (c) 2005 Excerpta Medica Inc. All fights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:805 / 809
页数:5
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], CENTR I REV BOARD IN
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2002, TIMELINE LAWS RELATE
[3]   Observational study of 353 applications to London multicentre research ethics committee 1997-2000 [J].
Boyce, M .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7372) :1081-1081
[4]   Sounding board - A central institutional review board for multi-institutional trials. [J].
Christian, MC ;
Goldberg, JL ;
Killen, J ;
Abrams, JS ;
McCabe, MS ;
Mauer, JK ;
Wittes, RE .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 346 (18) :1405-1408
[5]  
Department of Higher Education, 2004, COOP STUD PROGR GUID, P24
[6]   Variations among Institutional Review Board reviews in a multisite health services research study [J].
Dziak, K ;
Anderson, R ;
Sevick, MA ;
Weisman, CS ;
Levine, DW ;
Scholle, SH .
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2005, 40 (01) :279-290
[7]   Institutional review boards and multisite studies in health services research: Is there a better way? [J].
Gold, JL ;
Dewa, CS .
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2005, 40 (01) :291-307
[8]   Variability in institutional review board assessment of minimal-risk research [J].
Hirshon, JM ;
Krugman, SD ;
Witting, MD ;
Furuno, JP ;
Limcangco, MR ;
Perisse, AR ;
Rasch, EK .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2002, 9 (12) :1417-1420
[9]   The cost of institutional review board procedures in Multicenter Observational Research [J].
Humphreys, K ;
Trafton, J ;
Wagner, TH .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2003, 139 (01) :77-77
[10]   ETHICS APPROVAL FOR A NATIONAL POSTAL SURVEY - RECENT EXPERIENCE [J].
MIDDLE, C ;
JOHNSON, A ;
PETTY, T ;
SIMS, L ;
MACFARLANE, A .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 311 (7006) :659-660