A Process of Quality Improvement: Informed Participation and Institutional Process SACHRP March 27, 2008 Nancy Neveloff Dubler Director Center for Ethics.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ensuring Ethical Use of Quality Improvement Mary Ann Baily, PhD HIVQUAL US Advisory Committee Meeting August 24, 2008.
Advertisements

The Role of the IRB An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a review committee established to help protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects.
Definitions of EBP Popular in SW
1 QA, QI and Health Services Activities: Ethical Challenges Christine Grady Department of Bioethics NIH Clinical Center.
24 April Elements of Research Ethics Review II Social Value Malik Fernando M.B.,Ch.B. (Bristol)
Measuring Ethical Goals of Research Oversight Holly Taylor, PhD, MPH Department of Health Policy and Management Bloomberg School of Public Health Berman.
Ethical Considerations when Developing Human Research Protocols A discipline “born in scandal and reared in protectionism” Carol Levine, 1988.
Subject Selection and Recruitment David Wendler Department of Clinical Bioethics NIH, USA.
Columbia University IRB IRB 101 September 21, 2005 George Gasparis, Executive Director, CU IRB Asst. V.P. and Sr. Asst. Dean for Research Ethics.
Introduction to Research
Research Proposal Development of research question
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. THE TITLE “INTRODUCTION”
Chapter 3 Preparing and Evaluating a Research Plan Gay and Airasian
The Role of IRBs in Ensuring Ethical Conduct of QI Activities Mary Ann Baily, PhD Columbia IRB Conference April 1, 2011.
THE ETHICAL CONDUCT OF RESEARCH Chapter 4. HISTORY OF ETHICAL PROTECTIONS The Nuremberg Code The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), United.
Scientific Data Management for the Protection of Human Subjects Robert R. Downs NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) Center for International.
Research Methods for the Social Sciences: Ethics Ryan J. Martin, Ph.D. Thomas N. Cummings Research Fellow March 9, 2010.
Research Ethics John Porter London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Human Subject Research Ethics
The IRB's Position on Quality Projects vs. Research R. Peter Iafrate, Pharm.D. Chairman, Health Center IRB University of Florida.
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
AAA 3102 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Lecture 2 The Research Process & Literature Review.
Idara C.E.. Three ethical principles guides research with human participants. principle of Autonomy 1. The principle of Autonomy requires investigators.
International Research & Research Involving Children K. Lynn Cates, MD Assistant Chief Research & Development Officer Office of Research & Development.
DR. BETHANY FLECK: SOTL FACULTY ASSOCIATE MICHAELA CLEMENS: HSPP COORDINATOR USING STUDENTS AS PARTICIPANTS NAVIGATING THE IRB FOR S O TL WORK CENTER FOR.
15 September Development of Nursing Research.
What makes Clinical Research Ethical? Dr Enoka Corea Co-secretary, ERC Faculty of Medicine, Colombo.
Journal Club/September 24, Swing et al. Television and video game exposure and the development of attention problems. Pediatrics 2010;126:
Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Human Subject Protections: Working with the IRB Erin McClure, PhD Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.
Planned Emergency Research Exception from Informed Consent Requirements September 2007.
Ethics in Quality Improvement Quality Academy Cohort 6 Melanie Rathgeber MERGE Consulting.
May I have your permission please? The consent process: What, Where, When, Who and Why Valerie Smith OHRP IRB Program Manager
Effectiveness in Review & Oversight of Human Subjects Research Steven Joffe, MD, MPH Assistant Professor of Pediatrics.
Environmental Science
PSO Education for [agency/organization]’s PSES Workgroup (Presenter) (Date) 1 **For internal use by Center for Patient Safety PSO Participants. May not.
University of North Carolina at Greensboro Protecting Research Participants.
Chapter 18 Ethical Precautions in Music Therapy Research.
How to Successfully Apply to the IRB Richard Gordin, IRB Chair True Rubal, Administrator / Director For the Protection of Human Participants in Research.
Ethics in Research: APA code & Review Boards. Definition the study of proper action Morality right versus wrong it is the shared responsibility of the.
Deception in Human Research Learning Objectives Define Deception and Incomplete Disclosure Understand when Deception or Incomplete Disclosure are allowable.
(MEDICAL) CLINICAL AUDIT
AAHRPP ACCREDITATION (Association for the Accreditation of Human Protection Programs)
1 [INSERT SPEAKER NAME DATE & LOCATION HERE] Ethics of Tuberculosis Prevention, Care and Control MODULE 10: RESEARCH IN TB CARE AND CONTROL Insert country/ministry.
CUNY Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) School of Professional Studies April 18, 2013
Case Studies: Puzzles in Human Research Kevin L. Nellis, M.S., M.T. (A.S.C.P.) Program Analyst, Program for Research Integrity Development and Education.
WELCOME to the TULANE UNIVERSITY HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION OFFICE WORKSHOP for SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH (March 2, 2010) Tulane University HRPO Uptown.
 Epidemiology -- Research – or Not Research? Medical Research Summit March Tom Puglisi, PhD.
Regulatory requirements: children, assent, and consent waivers and waiver of documentation Bob Craig, 2007.
Cultural Competence Considerations [and other alliterations] in International Research IRB 2 Continuing Education March 10, 2015.
Introduction to Research. Purpose of Research Evidence-based practice Validate clinical practice through scientific inquiry Scientific rational must exist.
Idara C.E.. Three ethical principles guides research with human participants. principle of Autonomy 1. The principle of Autonomy requires investigators.
Conducting Research at Lincoln IRB/HRPP Policies, Procedures & Good Clinical Practices B Kanna MD, MPH, FACP Associate Program Director of Internal Medicine.
Human Specimen Repositories Requirements of 21 CFR Parts 50 & 56 PRIM & R May 5, 2004 Sally A. Hojvat, Ph.D. Director of Microbiology Devices Office of.
Legal Responsibilities for Studies Conducted or Supported by HHS Michael A. Carome, M.D. Associate Director for Regulatory Affairs Office for Human Research.
Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Human Subject Protections: Working with the IRB Erin A McClure, PhD Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.
Awareness of the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) at an Academic Health Center Dr. Genny Carrillo Department.
Research Ethics Dr Nichola Seare Aston Health Research & Innovation Cluster.
Tim Friede Department of Medical Statistics
Research ethics Rachel H. Ellaway
Back to Basics – Approval Criteria
Ethical Challenges in Knowledge Translation Research
Patricia M. Alt, Ph.D. Dept. of Health Science Towson University
World Health Organization
MUHC Innovation Model.
World Health Organization
Ethical Principles of Research
Ethics in Research.
Jeffrey M. Cohen, Ph.D. Associate Dean,
CUNY Human Research Protection Program (HRPP)
Chapter 13: Ethics and Law
Presentation transcript:

A Process of Quality Improvement: Informed Participation and Institutional Process SACHRP March 27, 2008 Nancy Neveloff Dubler Director Center for Ethics and Law in Medicine Department of Family and Social Medicine Montefiore Medical Center Professor of Bioethics The Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Ethical Justification: Research Research is not morally mandatory for institutions; Participation in research is not morally mandatory for human subjects; Research is important to advance medical science but participation is morally gratuitous because most research is not necessary for the survival of society; The principle of Justice might require the prior beneficiaries of research to repay the benefit that they gained; So vital social interest and justice might require participation— most conclude do not; Therefore, potential human subjects in research are morally free to consent to or to refuse participation.

Ethical Justification: Quality Improvement Medical professionals are morally required to engage in QI in order to revere the basic ethic of medicine [do no harm]; Individual health care organizations are morally required to engage in QI –an obligation derived from organizational ethics and the notion or institutional moral agency; Patients are morally required to participate in QI [Responsibilities from possible immediate benefit to self and responsibilities from benefits to others]

Definition of Quality Improvement in Medicine: “The group defined QI as the systematic, data-guided activities designed to bring about immediate improvements in health care delivery in a particular setting”. [The Ethics of Using Quality Improvement Methods in Health Care, Lynn et al, Annals, May 2007, Vol.146, No.9, ]

Elements of QI QI: systemic, data-guided and efficient QI: may inadvertently cause harm, waste scarce resources or affect some patients unfairly QI: distinguished from research: QI: hypothesis, plan, pilot, test, evaluate—repeat—implement –[Research: hypothesis, gather data, analyze, discuss] QI: uses experience to identify promising improvements, implements change on a small scale and monitors effects QI: may review aggregate data impose evidence based methods QI: is in intrinsic part of good clinical care

Ethical Requirements for Protection of Human Participants in QI Activities: Social or scientific value of the individual QI project; Scientific validity in design and methodology; Fair participant selection that does not overly burden one population nor stigmatize any population; Favorable risk-benefit ratio: basically minimal risk or less than minimal risk; Respect for participants Informed participation or occasionally in QI efforts that require individual actions, informed consent; Independent review by an institutional office authorized to approve or disapprove QI projects, to register these projects, to gather data on completion, to evaluate results and see to the implementation of new systems.

Similarities between QI and Research: Involve human participants; Are concerned with inquiry; Are processes in which empirical or systematic inquiry generates a question that data collection is designed to answer; Propose a set of outcome measures that will support proposal; Testing solutions; Involve critical evaluation of data.

Provisions in research for altering or waiving the requirement of Informed Consent: Exceptions to Informed Consent: IRB may alter or waive: (1) The research involves no more than minimal risk to the subjects; (2) The waiver or alteration will not adversely affect the rights and welfare of the subjects; (3) The research could not practicably be carried out without the waiver or alteration; and (4) Whenever appropriate the subjects will be provided with additional pertinent information after participation. § (d)

Informed participation: Clear statements by the health care institution about QI—obligation to participate in minimal risk QI projects for the immediate benefit to some patients and the long-term benefits for all; Oversight structure for QI—review before; Structure for accountability—implementation of positive findings after data are collected and analyzed; Feedback and Information for patients/participants.

Oversight Structure “Investigator” is uncertain QI registration site surveillance IRB concerns or “QI rejections” Institutional referrals Quality Improvement Research Committee Performance Improvement, Bioethics, Legal Affairs, Risk Management, Bioethics, Administration, Interdisciplinary Providers ResearchBoth Research and QIQuality Improvement IRB submission Informed consent QI project registration Informed participation Liability issues Legal Affairs Draft “Investigator” elects to not proceed

Registration Form

Conclusion: QI is morally mandatory for institutions physicians, and patients: It is part of the social contract of medicine that do no harm implies the need to improve as the skills and tools of improvement are developed. QI is not subject to review as research but is open, transparent and part of the culture of the medical center.