Variation in Institutional Review processes for a multisite observational study
Department of Quantitative Health Sciences
Ethics Committees, Research; Health Services Research; Hernia, Ventral; Humans; Observation; *Outcome Assessment (Health Care); *Program Evaluation; United States; United States Department of Veterans Affairs
Bioinformatics | Biostatistics | Epidemiology | Health Services Research
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.
Rights and Permissions
Citation: Am J Surg. 2005 Nov;190(5):805-9. Link to article on publisher's site
American journal of surgery
Vick, Catherine C.; Finan, Kelly R.; Kiefe, Catarina I.; Neumayer, Leigh; and Hawn, Mary T., "Variation in Institutional Review processes for a multisite observational study" (2005). Quantitative Health Sciences Publications and Presentations. 67.