The Quality Improvement Review Board: An Innovative Approach to Oversight of Projects That Do Not Meet Criteria of Human Subjects Research.

This article describes the development of an institutional quality improvement review board (QIRB) as an effective and efficient method for reviewing and overseeing institutional quality improvement (QI) initiatives. QI projects involve the systematic collection and analysis of data and the implemen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Quality Management in Health Care Vol. 33; no. 4; pp. 269 - 278
Autores principales: Denison, Toni L., Sorensen, Kristyn U., Blanton, Michael P., Johnson, Lara, Byrd, Theresa, Pass, Steven E., Philips, Lacy, Miller, Joyce, McMahon, Lance R., Cherry, Barbara
Formato: algorithm forms tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Oct-Dec2024
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=180475396&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 180475396
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10638628
        0O9
      jtl: Quality Management in Health Care
      issn: 10638628
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct-Dec2024
      vid: 33
      iid: 4
      pid: 5086
      pub: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
      place: Baltimore, Maryland
    artinfo:
      ui:
        180475396
        180475396
        180475396
        10.1097/QMH.0000000000000446
        180475396
      ppf: 269
      ppct: 9
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: The Quality Improvement Review Board: An Innovative Approach to Oversight of Projects That Do Not Meet Criteria of Human Subjects Research.
      aug:
        au:
          Denison, Toni L.
          Sorensen, Kristyn U.
          Blanton, Michael P.
          Johnson, Lara
          Byrd, Theresa
          Pass, Steven E.
          Philips, Lacy
          Miller, Joyce
          McMahon, Lance R.
          Cherry, Barbara
        affil: Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock
      sug:
        subj:
          Research Subjects
          Research, Medical
          Diffusion of Innovation
          Institutional Review
          Quality Improvement
          Data Collection
          Professional Organizations
          Peer Review
          Organizational Structure
          Interprofessional Relations
          Leadership
      ab: This article describes the development of an institutional quality improvement review board (QIRB) as an effective and efficient method for reviewing and overseeing institutional quality improvement (QI) initiatives. QI projects involve the systematic collection and analysis of data and the implementation of interventions designed to improve the quality of clinical care and/or educational programs for a distinct population in a specific setting. QI projects are fundamentally distinct from human subjects research (HuSR); however, the differences between them are subtle and highly nuanced. Determining whether a project meets the definition of QI or qualifies as HuSR, thus requiring institutional review board (IRB) review, can be confusing and frustrating. Nevertheless, this distinction is highly consequential due to the heavy regulatory requirements involved in HuSR and IRB oversight. Making the correct determination of a project's regulatory status is essential before the project begins. Project leaders may not realize that their work meets the definition of HuSR and, therefore, might conduct the project without appropriate IRB review. Therefore, best practices dictate that project leaders should not decide which type of institutional review is appropriate for their projects. In addition, when QI project teams attempt to disseminate the results of their work, documentation of formal review and approval is generally required by peer-reviewed journals and professional organizations. However, institutional review mechanisms are rarely available. Projects that do not meet the definition of HuSR fall outside the purview of IRBs and most institutions do not have an alternative review body. This creates frustration for both project leaders and IRB administrators. Apart from IRB review, a separate process for reviewing QI projects offers several benefits. These include (1) relieving the burden on busy IRB staff; (2) promoting scholarly activity; (3) protecting the institution, project leaders, and participants from HuSR conducted outside of appropriate IRB review; and (4) promoting rigorous QI methods.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        algorithm
        forms
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N