Accreditation - American Society for Investigative Pathology

How to Prevent Institutional

Shutdowns: Safeguarding Your

Human Subjects Research Program

A Workshop Sponsored by the

Experimental Biology 2005

Societies, April 5, 2005

Chair: Mark E. Sobel, MD, PhD mesobel@asip.org

Executive Officer, ASIP

Board of Directors, AAHRPP

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

How to Prevent Institutional Shutdowns:

Safeguarding Your Human Subjects Research

Program

12:00 Introduction: How accreditation can safeguard and improve the research enterprise: Mark E. Sobel, ASIP

12:20 Perspective of a Human Research

Protections Officer on Institutional

Shutdowns: Moira Keane, U. Minnesota

12:40 Perspective of a Researcher: Richard W.

Bianco, U. Minnesota

1:00 Panel Discussion

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Suspensions of U.S. federally supported research

1998 RushPresbyterian St Luke’s Medical Center

1999 Greater Los Angeles Health Care System,

West Los Angeles VAMC

1999 Duke University Medical Center

1999 University of Illinois, Chicago

2000 Virginia Commonwealth University

2001 University of Oklahoma Health Sciences

Center

2001 Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Media Attention

• Newspapers

• Magazines

• Television

• Radio

• Trade Publications

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Legal Actions

• Scheer v. Burke, et al

• Hamlet v. Fradin, et al

• Steubing v. Kornak, et al

• Quinn v. Abiomed, et al

• Gelsinger v. University of Pennsylvania

• Robertson, et al v. McGee et al

• Wright v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, et al

• Berman v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, et al

• Pamel H. Lett and Jim Lett v. The Ohio State University, et al

• Aderman v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

• Beth Wade v. Oregon Health and Science University

• Guckin v. Nagle, et al

• D’gosto, Marion v. FHCRC

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Consequences

• Protections are questioned

• Governmental response

• Private sector response

• Public’s trust in research is diminished

• Enrollments in clinical trials decrease

• Fewer patients consent to use of specimens

• Fear of loss of privacy and stigmatization

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Congressional Responses

• Increased Regulation

• Required Accreditation

• Enforced Financial Penalties

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

DHHS Responses

• FDA:

Updated Information Sheets

Minor revisions to regulations

Addition of Subpart D

Minor revisions to regulations

Addition of Subpart D

• Office of Civil Rights: HIPAA

• OHRP: Guidances

Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

All rights reserved

Benefits of a private sector response

• Deeper penetration and consistent implementation of regulatory compliance

• Change to a “culture of concern”

• Response is faster, flexible, and meaningful

• Builds public trust

• Instills confidence in sponsors

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Goals of Accreditation

• Protection of research participants

• Promotion of research that is consistent with ethical principles and standards

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Accreditation of human research protection programs

• Created in an environment of concern

• An integral component of a sound and quality-driven research policy

• Broad focus of responsibility beyond that of IRBs

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Accreditation Models

• AAHRPP: Association for the Accreditation of

Human Research Protection Programs:

Association of American Medical Colleges

Association of American Universities

Consortium of Social Science Associations

Federation of American Societies for Experimental

Biology

National Association of State Universities and Land

Grant Colleges

National Health Council

Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research

• PHRP: Partnership for Human Research

Protections: NCQA and JACHO

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Accreditation Models

• Voluntary

• Peer-driven

• Educationally based

• Standards:

DHHS: 45CFR 46

FDA: 21CFR 50, 56

• Assessment of performance-based outcomes

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

How does accreditation work?

AAHRPP

Self-assessment

Self Evaluation

Program Description

On-site evaluation

Council on

Accreditation

Expert site visitors

Tailored to organizational setting

Determines accreditation category

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Benefits of accreditation – sound ethics in research

• Improves human research protection programs

• Improves research quality

• Builds public trust

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Benefits of accreditation – achieving regulatory compliance

Assures regulatory compliance

• Reduces burden from government and industry inspection

• Leads to better risk management programs

• Gauges over-interpretation of regulations

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

Benefits of accreditation – competitive advantage

• Instills confidence in sponsors

• Helps in recruiting participants

• Attracts high-quality investigators

• Increases efficiency and reduces costs

• Fosters alliances with accredited organizations •Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved

In the end,

It’s the right thing to do

•Copyright © 2005 ASIP ®

•All rights reserved