Institutional Review Board Barriers and Solutions Encountered in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians to Improve Outcomes Now Study: a National Multicenter Practice-based Implementation Trial

Overview

Journal Pharmacotherapy

Specialty Pharmacology

Date 2013 May 8

PMID 23649880

Citations 7

Authors

Eric J MacLaughlin

Gail Ardery

Eric A Jackson

Timothy J Ives

Rodney B Young

David S Fike

Barry L Carter

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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.

Citing Articles

A cross-sectional examination of the profile of chiropractors recruited to the Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN): a sustainable resource for future chiropractic research.

Adams J, Peng W, Steel A, Lauche R, Moore C, Amorin-Woods L BMJ Open. 2017; 7(9):e015830.

PMID: 28965091 PMC: 5640145. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015830.

Engaging in Collaborative Research: Focus on the Pharmacy Practitioner.

Badowski M, Mazur J, Lam S, Miyares M, Schulz L, Michienzi S Hosp Pharm. 2017; 52(1):33-43.

PMID: 28179739 PMC: 5278912. DOI: 10.1310/hpj5201-33.

Avoiding Pitfalls With Implementation of Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trials: Strategies to Achieve Milestones.

Carter B, Ardery G J Am Heart Assoc. 2016; 5(12).

PMID: 27993832 PMC: 5210445. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.116.004432.

Sharing big biomedical data.

Toga A, Dinov I J Big Data. 2016; 2.

PMID: 26929900 PMC: 4768816. DOI: 10.1186/s40537-015-0016-1.

Cluster randomized trials for pharmacy practice research.

Gums T, Carter B, Foster E Int J Clin Pharm. 2015; 38(3):607-14.

PMID: 26715549 DOI: 10.1007/s11096-015-0205-1.

References

Bakken S, Lantigua R, Busacca L, Thomas Bigger J . Barriers, enablers, and incentives for research participation: a report from the Ambulatory Care Research Network (ACRN). J Am Board Fam Med. 2009; 22(4):436-45. PMC: 2744643. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.04.090017. View

Stair T, Reed C, Radeos M, Koski G, Camargo C . Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter clinical trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2001; 8(6):636-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb00177.x. View

Petersen L, Simpson K, SoRelle R, Urech T, Chitwood S . How variability in the institutional review board review process affects minimal-risk multisite health services research. Ann Intern Med. 2012; 156(10):728-35. PMC: 4174365. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-10-201205150-00011. View

Chobanian A, Bakris G, Black H, Cushman W, Green L, Izzo Jr J . The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003; 289(19):2560-72. DOI: 10.1001/jama.289.19.2560. View

Hirshon J, Krugman S, Witting M, Furuno J, Rhona Limcangco M, Perisse A . Variability in institutional review board assessment of minimal-risk research. Acad Emerg Med. 2002; 9(12):1417-20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002.tb01612.x. View

Dziak K, Anderson R, Sevick M, Weisman C, Levine D, Hudson Scholle S . Variations among Institutional Review Board reviews in a multisite health services research study. Health Serv Res. 2005; 40(1):279-90. PMC: 1361137. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00353.x. View

Silverman H, Hull S, Sugarman J . Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial. Crit Care Med. 2001; 29(2):235-41. PMC: 4809523. DOI: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00002. View

White K, Williams T, Greenberg B . The ecology of medical care. N Engl J Med. 1961; 265:885-92. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM196111022651805. View

Finch S, Barkin S, Wasserman R, Dhepyasuwan N, Slora E, Sege R . Effects of local institutional review board review on participation in national practice-based research network studies. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009; 163(12):1130-4. PMC: 4452200. DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.206. View

10.

Graham D, Spano M, Manning B . The IRB challenge for practice-based research: strategies of the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network (AAFP NRN). J Am Board Fam Med. 2007; 20(2):181-7. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.02.060110. View

11.

Stark A, Tyson J, Hibberd P . Variation among institutional review boards in evaluating the design of a multicenter randomized trial. J Perinatol. 2009; 30(3):163-9. PMC: 2924664. DOI: 10.1038/jp.2009.157. View

12.

Yawn B, Graham D, Bertram S, Kurland M, Dietrich A, Wollan P . Practice-based research network studies and institutional review boards: two new issues. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009; 22(4):453-60. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.04.080168. View

13.

Westfall J, Mold J, Fagnan L . Practice-based research--"Blue Highways" on the NIH roadmap. JAMA. 2007; 297(4):403-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.297.4.403. View

14.

Carter B, Ardery G, Dawson J, James P, Bergus G, Doucette W . Physician and pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(21):1996-2002. PMC: 2882170. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.358. View

15.

Carter B, Bergus G, Dawson J, Farris K, Doucette W, Chrischilles E . A cluster randomized trial to evaluate physician/pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008; 10(4):260-71. PMC: 2453045. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2008.07434.x. View

16.

Carter B, Clarke W, Ardery G, Weber C, James P, Vander Weg M . A cluster-randomized effectiveness trial of a physician-pharmacist collaborative model to improve blood pressure control. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010; 3(4):418-23. PMC: 2931811. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.908038. View

17.

Lindbloom E, Ewigman B, Hickner J . Practice-based research networks: the laboratories of primary care research. Med Care. 2004; 42(4 Suppl):III45-9. View

18.

Carter B, Rogers M, Daly J, Zheng S, James P . The potency of team-based care interventions for hypertension: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(19):1748-55. PMC: 2882164. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.316. View

19.

Green L, Fryer Jr G, Yawn B, Lanier D, Dovey S . The ecology of medical care revisited. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344(26):2021-5. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM200106283442611. View

20.

Green L, Lowery J, Kowalski C, Wyszewianski L . Impact of institutional review board practice variation on observational health services research. Health Serv Res. 2006; 41(1):214-30. PMC: 1681539. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00458.x. View