Determining when quality improvement initiatives should be considered research - Proposed criteria and potential implications

被引:143
作者
Casarett, D
Karlawish, JHT
Sugarman, J
机构
[1] Univ Penn, Ctr Bioeth, Inst Aging, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Div Geriatr, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Philadelphia Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Philadelphia, PA USA
[4] Alzheimers Dis Ctr, Philadelphia, PA USA
[5] Duke Univ, Dept Med, Durham, NC USA
[6] Duke Univ, Dept Philosophy, Durham, NC USA
[7] Duke Univ, Ctr Study Med Eth & Humanities, Durham, NC USA
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2000年 / 283卷 / 17期
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jama.283.17.2275
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Quality improvement initiatives have become a major force in shaping health care, These initiatives are diverse but share a common goal of generating knowledge that will guide improvements in health care, Although quality improvement occupies an uncertain territory between clinical care and research, this difference is extremely important, If a quality improvement initiative is research, federal regulations require a variety of procedures that must be followed to protect the human subjects involved. Conversely, if the same initiative is not research, the regulations outlining these procedures are not applicable. This article proposes 2 criteria to determine whether a quality improvement initiative should be reviewed as research, Such an initiative should be reviewed and regulated as research if (1) the majority of patients involved are not expected to benefit directly from the knowledge to be gained or (2) if additional risks or burdens are imposed to make the results generalizable. Implementation of these criteria offers the possibility that the rights and interests of those who participate in quality improvement initiatives will be protected.
引用
收藏
页码:2275 / 2280
页数:6
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   Developing and testing changes in delivery of care [J].
Berwick, DM .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1998, 128 (08) :651-656
[2]   ETHICAL ASPECTS OF HUMAN-EXPERIMENTATION IN HEALTH-SERVICES RESEARCH [J].
BRETT, A ;
GRODIN, M .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 265 (14) :1854-1857
[3]   Effect of continuous quality improvement analysis on the delivery of primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction [J].
Caputo, RP ;
Ho, KKL ;
Stoler, RC ;
Sukin, CA ;
Lopez, JJ ;
Cohen, DJ ;
Kuntz, RE ;
Berman, A ;
Carrozza, JP ;
Baim, DS .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1997, 79 (09) :1159-1164
[4]   The line between research and audit [J].
Choo, V .
LANCET, 1998, 352 (9125) :337-338
[5]  
Davidson F, 1997, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V277, P927
[6]  
FADEN RR, 1986, HIST THEORY INFORMED
[7]  
FREEDMAN B, 1992, CLIN RES, V40, P653
[8]   Satisfaction with clinical nurse specialists in a breast care clinic: Questionnaire survey [J].
Garvican, L ;
Grimsey, E ;
Littlejohns, P ;
Lowndes, S ;
Sacks, N .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 316 (7136) :976-+
[9]   ETHICAL ISSUES IN ADMINISTRATIVE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT - APPLYING THE CONCEPT OF PRIOR NOTIFICATION TO THE CONDUCT OF FIRM TRIALS [J].
GOLDBERG, HI .
MEDICAL CARE, 1990, 28 (09) :822-833
[10]  
Langley G.J., 1996, IMPROVEMENT GUIDE PR