Digital Repository, Institutional Repository, DigitalCommons

The University of Texas School of Nursing at Houston and HAM-TMC Library discuss the benefits of an institutional repository, DigitalCommons, and cover initial steps to create accounts and publish to the institutions DigitalCommons.

Federally regulated institutional review boards: The aspects of a "model" IRB---Is the current system in need of a tune up or complete overhaul?

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the primary gatekeepers for the protection of ethical standards of federally regulated research on human subjects in this country. This paper focuses on what general, broad measures that may be instituted or enhanced to exemplify a "model IRB". This is done by examining the current regulatory standards of federally regulated IRBs, not private or commercial boards, and how many of those standards have been found either inadequate or not generally understood or followed. The analysis includes suggestions on how to bring about changes in order to make the IRB process more efficient, less subject to litigation, and create standardized educational protocols for members. The paper also considers how to include better oversight for multi-center research, increased centralization of IRBs, utilization of Data Safety Monitoring Boards when necessary, payment for research protocol review, voluntary accreditation, and the institution of evaluation/quality assurance programs. ^ This is a policy study utilizing secondary analysis of publicly available data. Therefore, the research for this paper focuses on scholarly medical/legal journals, web information from the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Drug Administration, and the Office of the Inspector General, Accreditation Programs, law review articles, and current regulations applicable to the relevant portions of the paper. ^ Two issues are found to be consistently cited by the literature as major concerns. One is a need for basic, standardized educational requirements across all IRBs and its members, and secondly, much stricter and more informed management of continuing research. There is no federally regulated formal education system currently in place for IRB members, except for certain NIH-based trials. Also, IRBs are not keeping up with research once a study has begun, and although regulated to do so, it does not appear to be a great priority. This is the area most in danger of increased litigation. Other issues such as voluntary accreditation and outcomes evaluation are slowing gaining steam as the processes are becoming more available and more sought after, such as JCAHO accrediting of hospitals. ^ Adopting the principles discussed in this paper should promote better use of a local IRBs time, money, and expertise for protecting the vulnerable population in their care. Without further improvements to the system, there is concern that private and commercial IRBs will attempt to create a monopoly on much of the clinical research in the future as they are not as heavily regulated and can therefore offer companies quicker and more convenient reviews. IRBs need to consider the advantages of charging for their unique and important services as a cost of doing business. More importantly, there must be a minimum standard of education for all IRB members in the area of the ethical standards of human research and a greater emphasis placed on the follow-up of ongoing research as this is the most critical time for study participants and may soon lead to the largest area for litigation. Additionally, there should be a centralized IRB for multi-site trials or a study website with important information affecting the trial in real time. There needs to be development of standards and metrics to assess the performance of the IRBs for quality assurance and outcome evaluations. The boards should not be content to run the business of human subjects' research without determining how well that function is actually being carried out. It is important that federally regulated IRBs provide excellence in human research and promote those values most important to the public at large.^

Latino perceptions of and barriers to preventive healthcare maintenance in the southwest United States

Between the 1990 and 2000 Censuses, the Latino population accounted for 40% of the increase in the nation’s total population. The growing population of Latinos underscores the importance for understanding factors that influence whether and how Latinos take care of their health. According to the U.S. Department of Human Health Service’s Office of Minority Health (OMH), Latinos are at greater risk for health disparities (2003). Factors such as lack of health insurance and access to preventive care play a major role in limiting Latino use of primary health care (Institute of Medicine, 2005). Other significant barriers to preventive health care maintenance behaviors have been identified in current literature such as primary care physician interaction, self-perceived health status, and socio-cultural beliefs and traditions (Rojas-Guyler, King, Montieth and 2008; Meir, Medina, and Ory, 2007; Black, 1999). Despite these studies, there remains less information regarding interpersonal perceptions, environmental dynamics and individual and cultural attitudes relevant to utilization of healthcare (Rojas-Guyler, King, Montieth and 2008; Aguirre-Molina, Molina and Zambrana, 2001). Understanding the perceptions of Latinos and the barriers to health care could directly affect healthcare delivery. Improved healthcare utilization among Latinos could reduce the long term health consequences of many preventable and manageable diseases. The purpose of this study was to explore Latino perceptions of U.S. health care and desired changes by Latinos in the U.S. healthcare system. The study had several objectives, including to explore perceived barriers to healthcare utilization and the resulting effects on health among Latinos, to describe culturally influenced attitudes about health care and use of health care services among Latinos, and to make recommendations for reducing disparities by improving healthcare and its utilization. The current study utilized data that were collected as part of a larger study to examine multidimensional, cross-cultural issues relevant to interactions between healthcare consumers and providers. Qualitative methods were used to analyze four Spanish-language focus group transcripts to interpret cultural influences on perceptions and beliefs among Latinos. Direct coding of transcript content was carried out by two reviewers, who conducted independent reviews of each transcript. Team members developed and refined thematic categories, positive and negative cases, and example text segments for each theme and sub-theme. Incongruities of interpretations were resolved through extensive discussion. Study participants included 44 self-identified Latino adults (16 male, 28 female) between age 18 and 64 years. Thirty seven (84.1%) of the participants were immigrants. The study population comprised eight ethnic subgroups. While 31% of the participants reported being employed on a full-time basis, only 18.4% had medical insurance that was private or employee sponsored. Five major themes regarding the perceptions and healthcare utilization behaviors of Latinos were consistent across all focus groups and were identified during the analysis. These were: (1) healthcare utilization, experience, and access; (2) organizational and institutional systems; (3) communication and interpersonal interactions between healthcare provider, staff, and patient; (4) Latinos’ perception of their own health status; (5) cultural influences on healthcare utilization, which included an innovation termed culturally-bound locus of control. Healthcare utilization was directly influenced by healthcare experience, access, current health status, and cultural factors and indirectly influenced by organizational systems. There was a strong interdependence among the main themes. The ability to communicate and interact effectively with healthcare providers and navigate healthcare systems (organizational and institutional access) significantly influenced the participant’s health care experience, most often (indirectly) impacting utilization negatively. ^ Research such as this can help to identify those perceptions and attitudes held by Latinos concerning utilization or underutilization of healthcare systems. These data suggest that for healthcare utilization to improve among Latinos, healthcare systems must create more culturally competent environments by providing better language services at the organizational level and more culturally sensitive providers at the interpersonal level. Better understanding of the complex interactions between these impediments can aid intervention developments, and help health providers and researchers in determining appropriate, adequate, and effective measurers of care to better increase overall health of Latinos.^

A study to determine the association between medical decision-making and the performance of an institutional ethics committee

This study developed proxy measures to test the independent effects of medical specialty, institutional ethics committee (IEC) and the interaction between the two, upon a proxy for the dependent variable of the medical decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying--the resuscitation index (R-index). Five clinical vignettes were constructed and validated to convey the realism and contextual factors implicit in the decision to withhold/withdraw care. A scale was developed to determine the range of contact by an IEC in terms of physician knowledge and use of IEC policy.^ This study was composed of a sample of 215 physicians in a teaching hospital in the Southwest where proxy measures were tested for two competing influences, medical specialty and IEC, which alternately oppose and support the decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying. A sub-sample of surgeons supported the hypothesis that an IEC is influential in opposing the medical training imperative to prolong life.^ Those surgeons with a low IEC score were 326 percent more likely to continue care than were surgeons with a high IEC score when compared to all other specialties. IEC alone was also found to significantly predict the decision to withhold/withdraw care. Interaction of IEC with the specialty of surgery was found to be the best predictor for a decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying. ^

Perceptions of institutional support of community -based participatory research within prevention research centers

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the future of health care states that the focus on health needs to shift to the management and prevention of chronic illnesses and that academic health centers (AHCs) should play an active role in this process through community partnerships (IOM, 2002). Grant funding from the National Institutes of Health and the creation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Research Centers (PRC) across the county represent a transition toward more proactively seeking out community partnerships to better design and disseminate health promotion programs (Green, 2001). ^ The focus of the PRCs is to conduct rigorous, community-based, prevention research, to seek outcomes applicable to public health programs and policies. The PRCs work is to create and foster partnerships among public health and community organizations, to address health promotion and disease prevention issues (CDC, 2003). ^ The W.K. Kellogg Foundation defines CBPR as "a collaborative approach to research that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each brings. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community with the aim of combining knowledge and action for social change to improve community health." ^ In 1995, CDC asked the IOM to review the PRC program to examine the extent to which the program is providing the public health community with strategies to address public health problems in disease prevention and health promotion (IOM, 1997). No comprehensive evaluation n of the individual PRCs had ever been done (IOM, 1997). ^ The CDC was interested in understanding how it could better support the PRC program through improved management and oversight to influence the program's success. The CDC only represents one of the entities that influence the success of a PRC. Another key entity to consider is the support of and influence of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside. Using evaluation criteria similar to those that were developed by the IOM, this study examined how aspects of structural capacity of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside are perceived to influence PRC community-based research activities. ^