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.^

The medical malpractice insurance "crises" and federal medical malpractice tort reform: Collection and analysis of bills passed by the United States House of Representatives from 1995--2005

There have been three medical malpractice insurance "crises" in the United States over a time spanning roughly the past three decades (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Each crisis is characterized by a number of common features, including rapidly increasing medical malpractice insurance premiums, cancellation of existing insurance policies, and a decreased willingness of insurers to offer or renew medical malpractice insurance policies (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Given the recurrent "crises," many sources argue that medical malpractice insurance coverage has become too expensive a commodity—one that many physicians simply cannot afford (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 2002, p. 1-2; Physician Insurers Association of America [PIAA], 2003, p. 1; Jackiw, 2004, p. 506; Glassman, 2004, p. 417; Padget, 2003, p. 216). ^ The prohibitively high cost of medical liability insurance is said to limit the geographical areas and medical specializations in which physicians are willing to practice. As a result, the high costs of medical liability insurance are ultimately said to affect whether or not people have access to health care services. ^ In an effort to control the medical liability insurance crises—and to preserve or restore peoples' access to health care—every state in the United States has passed "at least some laws designed to reduce medical malpractice premium rates" (GAO, 2003, p.5-6). More recently, however, the United States has witnessed a push to implement federal reform of the medical malpractice tort system. Accordingly, this project focuses on federal medical malpractice tort reform. This project was designed to investigate the following specific question: Do the federal medical malpractice tort reform bills which passed in the House of Representatives between 1995 and 2005 differ in respect to their principle features? To answer this question, the text of the bills, law review articles, and reports from government and private agencies were analyzed. Further, a matrix was compiled to concisely summarize the principle features of the proposed federal medical malpractice tort reform bills. Insight gleaned from this investigation and matrix compilation informs discussion about the potential ramifications of enacting federal medical malpractice tort reform legislation. ^

The Texas driver responsibility program: A preliminary analysis of the impact on impaired driving and trauma system funding

Objective. In 2003, the State of Texas instituted the Driver Responsibility Program (TDRP), a program consisting of a driving infraction point system coupled with a series of graded fines and annual surcharges for specific traffic violations such as driving while intoxicated (DWI). Approximately half of the revenues generated are earmarked to be disbursed to the state's trauma system to cover uncompensated trauma care costs. This study examined initial program implementation, the impact of trauma system funding, and initial impact on impaired driving knowledge, attitudes and behaviors. A model for targeted media campaigns to improve the program's deterrence effects was developed. ^ Methods. Data from two independent driver survey samples (conducted in 1999 and 2005), department of public safety records, state health department data and a state auditor's report were used to evaluate the program's initial implementation, impact and outcome with respect to drivers' impaired driving knowledge, attitudes and behavior (based on constructs of social cognitive theory) and hospital uncompensated trauma care funding. Survey results were used to develop a regression model of high risk drivers who should be targeted to improve program outcome with respect to deterring impaired driving. ^ Results. Low driver compliance with fee payment (28%) and program implementation problems were associated with lower surcharge revenues in the first two years ($59.5 million versus $525 million predicted). Program revenue distribution to trauma hospitals was associated with a 16% increase in designated trauma centers. Survey data demonstrated that only 28% of drivers are aware of the TDRP and that there has been no initial impact on impaired driving behavior. Logistical regression modeling suggested that target media campaigns highlighting the likelihood of DWI detection by law enforcement and the increased surcharges associated with the TDRP are required to deter impaired driving. ^ Conclusions. Although the TDRP raised nearly $60 million in surcharge revenue for the Texas trauma system over the first two years, this study did not find evidence of a change in impaired driving knowledge, attitudes or behaviors from 1999 to 2005. Further research is required to measure whether the program is associated with decreased alcohol-related traffic fatalities. ^

Policy analysis of Texas Senate Bill 532 and the regulation of nurse practitioners in the convenience care model

Background. Retail clinics, also called convenience care clinics, have become a rapidly growing trend since their initial development in 2000. These clinics are coupled within a larger retail operation and are generally located in "big-box" discount stores such as Wal-mart or Target, grocery stores such as Publix or H-E-B, or in retail pharmacies such as CVS or Walgreen's (Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, 2008). Care is typically provided by nurse practitioners. Research indicates that this new health care delivery system reduces cost, raises quality, and provides a means of access to the uninsured population (e.g., Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, 2008; Convenient Care Association, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c; Hansen-Turton, Miller, Nash, Ryan, Counts, 2007; Salinsky, 2009; Scott, 2006; Ahmed & Fincham, 2010). Some healthcare analysts even suggest that retail clinics offer a feasible solution to the shortage of primary care physicians facing the nation (AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange, 2010). ^ The development and performance of retail clinics is heavily dependent upon individual state policies regulating NPs. Texas currently has one of the most highly regulated practice environments for NPs (Stout & Elton, 2007; Hammonds, 2008). In September 2009, Texas passed Senate Bill 532 addressing the scope of practice of nurse practitioners in the convenience care model. In comparison to other states, this law still heavily regulates nurse practitioners. However, little research has been conducted to evaluate the impact of state laws regulating nurse practitioners on the development and performance of retail clinics. ^ Objectives. (1). To describe the potential impact that SB 532 has on retail clinic performance. (2). To discuss the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of the convenience care model. (3). To describe possible alternatives to Texas' nurse practitioner scope of practice guidelines as delineated in Texas Senate Bill 532. (4). To describe the type of nurse practitioner state regulation (i.e. independent, light, moderate, or heavy) that best promotes the convenience care model. ^ Methods. State regulations governing nurse practitioners can be characterized as independent, light, moderate, and heavy. Four state NP regulatory types and retail clinic performance were compared and contrasted to that of Texas regulations using Dunn and Aday's theoretical models for conducting policy analysis and evaluating healthcare systems. Criteria for measurement included effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Comparison states were Arizona (Independent), Minnesota (Light), Massachusetts (Moderate), and Florida (Heavy). ^ Results. A comparative states analysis of Texas SB 532 and alternative NP scope of practice guidelines among the four states: Arizona, Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota, indicated that SB 532 has minimal potential to affect the shortage of primary care providers in the state. Although SB 532 may increase the number of NPs a physician may supervise, NPs are still heavily restricted in their scope of practice and limited in their ability to act as primary care providers. Arizona's example of independent NP practice provided the best alternative to affect the shortage of PCPs in Texas as evidenced by a lower uninsured rate and less ED visits per 1,000 population. A survey of comparison states suggests that retail clinics thrive in states that more heavily restrict NP scope of practice as opposed to those that are more permissive, with the exception of Arizona. An analysis of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of the convenience care model indicates that retail clinics perform well in the areas of effectiveness and efficiency; but, fall short in the area of equity. ^ Conclusion. Texas Senate 532 represents an incremental step towards addressing the problem of a shortage of PCPs in the state. A comparative policy analysis of the other four states with varying degrees of NP scope of practice indicate that a more aggressive policy allowing for independent NP practice will be needed to achieve positive changes in health outcomes. Retail clinics pose a temporary solution to the shortage of PCPs and will need to expand their locations to poorer regions and incorporate some chronic care to obtain measurable health outcomes. ^