STUDY OBJECTIVE: To categorize institutional review board (IRB) challenges and solutions encountered in a multicenter practice-based research network (PBRN) study and to assess the impact of IRB requirements on the willingness of individual principal investigators (PIs) to participate in future PBRN studies. DESIGN: Descriptive analysis of IRB challenges and solutions encountered in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians to Improve Outcomes Now (CAPTION) trial, a multicenter prospective cluster-randomized study conducted by the National Interdisciplinary Primary Care PBRN, and a correlational analysis from a survey of individual site PIs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: IRB barriers encountered and solutions were categorized for study sites. A survey of study-site PIs was conducted with a correlational analysis assessing the impact of various IRB requirements and the willingness of individual PIs to participate in future PBRN studies; of 31 study sites participating in the CAPTION study, 28 study-site PIs were surveyed. IRBs posed a number of challenges including bias regarding the source of the application, issues regarding study design, study instruments, access to patient records, study procedures, Spanish-only speaking subjects, role of clinic physicians, interdepartmental concerns, and updates at continuing review. Responses from the PI survey (21 of 28 PIs surveyed [75% response rate]) indicated that the willingness of an individual to serve as a PI in the future was inversely related to the perceived difficulty of obtaining initial (rS = -0.599, p=0.004) and continuing (rS = -0.464, p=0.034) IRB approval. CONCLUSION: Significant time and resources were required to address various challenges associated with IRB approval, which had a negative impact on an individual PI's willingness to participate in future PBRN projects. A revision of current rules and regulations regarding the protection of human subjects for practice-based studies, improvement in IRB processes, and support from coordinating centers may decrease the burden associated with IRB approval and increase participation in practice-based research.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To categorize institutional review board (IRB) challenges and solutions encountered in a multicenter practice-based research network (PBRN) study and to assess the impact of IRB requirements on the willingness of individual principal investigators (PIs) to participate in future PBRN studies. DESIGN: Descriptive analysis of IRB challenges and solutions encountered in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians to Improve Outcomes Now (CAPTION) trial, a multicenter prospective cluster-randomized study conducted by the National Interdisciplinary Primary Care PBRN, and a correlational analysis from a survey of individual site PIs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: IRB barriers encountered and solutions were categorized for study sites. A survey of study-site PIs was conducted with a correlational analysis assessing the impact of various IRB requirements and the willingness of individual PIs to participate in future PBRN studies; of 31 study sites participating in the CAPTION study, 28 study-site PIs were surveyed. IRBs posed a number of challenges including bias regarding the source of the application, issues regarding study design, study instruments, access to patient records, study procedures, Spanish-only speaking subjects, role of clinic physicians, interdepartmental concerns, and updates at continuing review. Responses from the PI survey (21 of 28 PIs surveyed [75% response rate]) indicated that the willingness of an individual to serve as a PI in the future was inversely related to the perceived difficulty of obtaining initial (rS = -0.599, p=0.004) and continuing (rS = -0.464, p=0.034) IRB approval. CONCLUSION: Significant time and resources were required to address various challenges associated with IRB approval, which had a negative impact on an individual PI's willingness to participate in future PBRN projects. A revision of current rules and regulations regarding the protection of human subjects for practice-based studies, improvement in IRB processes, and support from coordinating centers may decrease the burden associated with IRB approval and increase participation in practice-based research.
Authors: Jon Mark Hirshon; Scott D Krugman; Michael D Witting; Jon P Furuno; M Rhona Limcangco; Andre R Perisse; Elizabeth K Rasch Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Kathleen Dziak; Roger Anderson; Mary Ann Sevick; Carol S Weisman; Douglas W Levine; Sarah Hudson Scholle Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Laura A Petersen; Kate Simpson; Richard Sorelle; Tracy Urech; Supicha Sookanan Chitwood Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 25.391