SOP Problems and Adverse Events, Record and Report

Similar documents
University of South Carolina. Unanticipated Problems and Adverse Events Guidelines

Biomedical IRB MS #

UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD REPORTING UNANTICIPATED PROBLEMS INCLUDING ADVERSE EVENTS

Public Input for Changes to Reportable Events Policy

1.2.1 It is the policy of the University of Alabama that qualifying research may be reviewed using an expedited procedure.

Department of Defense Human Research Protection Program DOD INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT FOR INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) REVIEW (IAIR)

Genesis Health System. Institutional Review Board. Standard Operating Procedures

Research Audits PGR. Effective: 12/04/2013 Reviewed: 12/04/2015. Name of Associated Policy: Palmetto Health Administrative Research Review

TITLE: Reporting Adverse Events SOP #: RCO-204 Page: 1 of 5 Effective Date: 01/31/18

I. Scope This policy defines unanticipated problems and adverse events and establishes the reporting process and timeline.

HIC Standard Operating Procedure. For-Cause Audits of Human Research Studies

ETHICAL AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

Title: Investigator Responsibilities. SOP Number: 1501 Effective Date: June 2, 2017

SUNY Upstate Medical University GUIDELINES & POLICIES

PROMPTLY REPORTABLE EVENTS

1. Department of Defense (DoD) Human Subjects Protection Regulatory Requirements

INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OF RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

BIMO SITE AUDIT CHECKLIST

Reporting to the IRB How to Report the Essentials and Improve the Protection of Human Subjects

Keele Clinical Trials Unit

IRB 04. Research Supported by the Department of Defense

(Type inside gray boxes, cells will expand) A. EIGHT POINT CRITERIA for IRB Review

WASHINGTON & JEFFERSON COLLEGE. Institutional Review Board (IRB) Policies and Guidelines

MARKEY CANCER CENTER CLINICAL RESEARCH ORGANIZATION STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP No.: MCCCRO-D

IRB 101. Rachel Langhofer Joan Rankin Shapiro Research Administration UA College of Medicine - Phoenix

National Cancer Institute. Central Institutional Review Board. Standard Operating Procedures

12.0 Investigator Responsibilities

University of Colorado Denver Human Research Protection Program Investigator Responsibilities for the Protection of Human Subjects

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

Purpose: To provide policy and guidelines and helpful information for conducting research at Brooks

Study Management SM STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR Adverse Event Reporting

IACUC Policy 09: Researcher Non-Compliance

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OF HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH LAST REVISION DATE 5/3/17

Human Subject Regulations Decision Charts

Office of Human Research Office of Human Research Policy and Procedure Manual. Version: 4/4/18

SECNAVINST E ONR Dec 2017 SECNAV INSTRUCTION E. From: Secretary of the Navy. Subj: HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION PROGRAM

SOP : Quality Assurance Inspections SCOPE RESPONSIBILITIES. APPROVAL AUTHORITY EFFECTIVE DATE May PURPOSE 2.

Institutional Review Board Standard Operating Procedures. Education and Training on Human Subject Research Date Last Revised: OVERVIEW

Department of Defense Human Research Protection Program AF ISSUED DOD INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT FOR INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) REVIEW (IAIR)

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY

FDA Medical Device Regulations vs. ISO 14155

"Getting Your Protocol Through the IRB"

The SOP applies to all human subject research falling under the purview of the University of Missouri Institutional Review Board.

CLOSE OUT VISIT REPORT (NO CRF TO MONITOR)

Signature Date Date First Effective: Signature Date Revision Date:

KBEMS Pilot Programs- Adverse Event Notification

Summary of the Common Rule Changes

PROCEDURES GOVERNING HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH

NEW STANDARD OF PRACTICE PRESCRIBING

20 STEPS FROM STUDY IDEA INCEPTION TO PUBLISHING RESEARCH/ Evidence-Based Practice

LOUIS STOKES CLEVELAND VA MEDICAL CENTER RESEARCH SERVICE Human Subject Protection Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

Risk-Benefit Ratio and Determinations. Sarah Mumford, Ammon Pate, Annie Risenmay IRB Operations Managers University of Utah

DO I NEED TO SUBMIT FOR THIS?... & OTHER FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. March 2015 IRB Forum

General Administration GA STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR Sponsor Responsibility and Delegation of Responsibility

SAINT AGNES MEDICAL CENTER CLINICAL RESEARCH CENTER Fresno, California. STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES Institutional Review Board

Institutional Review Board Application for Exempt Status Determination

Human Research Protection Program Institutional Review Board

SECNAVINST D BUMED-M00R 6 November 2006

UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Data and Safety Monitoring Plan

G U I D E L I N E S. for the. FGCU Institutional Review Board (IRB)

Good Documentation Practices. Human Subject Research. for

Documenting the Story of a Clinical Trial: Concept to CAPA. Lori T. Gilmartin Gilmartin Consulting LLC

STUDY INFORMATION POST-IRB APPROVAL FDA DEVICE (IDE) SPONSOR AND INVESTIGATOR RESPONSIBILITY (21 CFR 812)

New Study Submissions to the IRB

How to Prepare for Federal Inspections and What to Expect

Demystifying the IRB

11/18/2016. UC Irvine s Clinical Research Coordinator Certification Preparation Series PI Roles and Responsibilities SESSION 4

University of Colorado Denver Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB) Policies and Procedures for the Protection of Human Subjects

Clinical Research Seminar

Request to Use an External IRB as an IRB of Record

Effective Date: November 12, 2015 Policy Number: MHC_RP0306. Corporate Director, HRPP Institutional Official, HRPP

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

Loyola University Chicago Health Sciences Division Maywood, IL. Human Subject Research Project Start-Up Guide

10 STEPS TO IRB APPROVAL

Self-Monitoring Tool

IRB Federal Regulations Comparison Table 4/24/01 as updated through 10/31/01

NN SS 401 NEURONEXT NETWORK STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR SITE SELECTION AND QUALIFICATION

Adverse Events: Thorough Analysis

Dr. R. Sathianathan. Role & Responsibilities of Principal Investigators in Clinical Trials. 18 August 2015

PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT Between The U.S. Small Business Administration And The U.S. Department of Defense

Children s Hospital & Health Center Research Approval Updated 05/27/04

Yale University Institutional Review Boards

Good Clinical Practice: A Ground Level View

Tufts Medical Center (Tufts MC) and Tufts University Health Sciences (TUHS) IRB Western IRB (WIRB) Submission Policy

SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

IRB Process for SURF April 21, 2015

Title: OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS/IRB/ORIP COORDINATION

Local VA VA ORD CSP Other VA ORD. IRB of Record Registration Number: IRB Operated by: Local VA Non-local VA Academic Affiliate VHA Central IRB

San Francisco Department of Public Health Policy Title: HIPAA Compliance Privacy and the Conduct of Research Page 1 of 10

A Principal Investigator s Guide to Responsibilities, Qualifications, Records and Documentation of Human Research University of Kentucky

DANA-FARBER / HARVARD CANCER CENTER POLICIES FOR HUMAN SUBJECT RESEARCH TITLE:

Initially Submitted on 11/24/2009 Final Submission By Test6 CA on 11/24/2009 1:51 PM Approval By student13 student13 on 11/24/2009 1:52 PM Attendees

REGULATORY AND FUNDING CHANGES FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES WARNING LETTER. (b) (4) clinical investigation (Protocol entitled A Phase II, Multicenter,

NHS Information Standards Board

Human Samples in Research

BAY-ARENAC BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AUTHORITY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL

When a Single IRB Reviews for Multiple Sites:

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Archived. DPC: Corrective Action. Quality Manual

Transcription:

Office of Research Integrity - Human Subjects SOP #: ORI(HS)- 1.0 Page #: Page 1 of 5 Approved By: ORI Executive Director *Signature on file Date: Date First Effective: 11/18/2013 Approved by: Biomedical Chair *Signature on file Date: Approved by: Social Behavioral Chair *Signature on file Date: Revision Date: SOP - Problems and Adverse Events, Record and Report 1. Objective This SOP is intended to describe the mechanism for classifying problems that occur during the course of research as well as when and how to record and/or report such problems to the IRB. 2. General Description Problems occur during research. Having a uniform system for classifying, recording and reporting problems will help protect the safety of human subjects and others, as well as the overall integrity of the study. Definitions Problem - encompasses everything that goes wrong during the course of research, though the primary concern is focused around problems as they concern the safety, rights, and welfare of the research participants and others, and/or the integrity of the study. Adverse Event (AE) - as the term is used in guidance, literature, and common vernacular, is a more specific type of problem that is generally considered to be related to the health of a study participant. For the purposes of this SOP, the term problem encompasses the more narrowly defined term adverse event. Problems AEs 3. Roles & Responsibilities Execution of SOP: Principal Investigators (PI)/Study Personnel (SP), IRB Chair, IRB, Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Staff. It is the primary responsibility of the Principal Investigator and research team members to address

Page 2 of 5 and record any problems that occur during the course of research. For the research team member who encounters a study problem, it is recommended that they report the problem to the PI in a timely or immediate manner. *Immediate action, including one-time changes to approved study procedures, may be taken to avoid apparent and immediate harm to subjects or others. Using the basic classification system described in the procedures section below provides a good indication when (not if) a problem needs to be reported to the IRB. All problems need to be reported to the IRB, though, not all problems require immediate reporting or follow-up action. There may be additional requirements or desire to report certain problem events and/or any followup actions to federal agencies, or other outside entities. It is the responsibility of the IRB to assess the problems reported by researchers. Problems that adversely affect the rights and/or welfare of subjects, and/or the integrity of the study may warrant further action (discussed in more detail below). There may be additional requirements or desire to report certain problem events and/or any follow-up actions to federal agencies, or other outside entities. 4. Procedures It is highly recommended that the PI utilize the following classification system when recording and assessing problem events. The ORI-HS and IRB will utilize the following classification system when assessing problems reported by the PI or other researchers. 1) Assessment Rate the problem on the following three scaled criteria: Not Serious Serious Seriousness as being most closely associated with the safety, rights and/or welfare of study subjects or others. Anticipated Unanticipated The anticipated nature of the event as being most closely associated with potential problem events previously outlined in the study protocol as an expected occurrence, for which there is likely a procedural measure to help any reduce risk of harm. If the problem event is not previously discussed as expected in the study protocol, then it may be classified as unanticipated. Not Study Related Study Related The relatedness of the event as being most closely associated with participation in the study, or having been affected by the presence of the study. 2) Reporting If the problem event is found to have any two of the three scaled assessment criteria: serious, unanticipated, or study related, then timely reporting of the event needs to be made to the IRB office. If the problem event is found to have all three of the qualities serious, unanticipated, and

Page 3 of 5 study related, then an immediate report needs to be made to the IRB office. If the event is found to have only one or none of the qualities serious, unanticipated, or study related, then the problem event may be recorded for reporting to the IRB office at the time of continuing review. * Immediate action, including one-time changes to approved study procedures, may be taken to avoid apparent and immediate harm to subjects or others. A diagram of the above discussion is provided below: The orange areas describe problem events that should be reported in timely manner (having 2 of any of the three qualities serious, unanticipated, or study related). Within 10 calendar days. The pink area describes problem events that should be reported immediately (having all three of the qualities serious, unanticipated, and study related). Within 48 hours of the occurrence. The white area describes problem events that may be reported at the time of continuing review or study closure (having one or none of the three qualities serious, unanticipated, or study related). An initial problem report may take any form such as a phone call, email, excel spreadsheet, etc. but will eventually need to inform the IRB office in a formal manner where the event(s) are presented in a formal document with a date and acknowledgment from the Principal Investigator. The report should seek to: Provide a time line of the event(s), Discuss any steps or actions taken toward correcting the problem(s),

Page 4 of 5 Include a brief assessment from the Principal Investigator as to why the event(s) occurred, Include a brief assessment from the Principal Investigator as to whether or not a modification to current study procedures or alteration to the informed consent process is warranted. 3) Review The ORI-HS and IRB, when reviewing problem events, will consider the above classification system in conjunction with the formal problem event report to help determine the necessary level of review and action required to adequately address any concerns. In addition, the problem event(s) will be reviewed with consideration to 1) risk to subjects or others; 2) the overall study risk/benefit ratio; 3) the approved informed consent document; and 4) any possible need for the re-consent of current subjects, or to provide them with new information. Problem events reported at any time other than the time of continuing review will be entered into the ORI-HS database as a study action requiring review concurrent with the previously established level of review for that study and or by an IRB Chair. If during the course of a problem event review, it is thought that a higher level of review of the event(s) is required, then arrangements will be made to obtain that review. Problem events reported at the time of continuing review will be considered reviewed in accordance with the rules and procedures established for continuing review. See SOP 5.10. Some problems may require corrective action or additional consideration under the SOP governing researcher noncompliance. See SOP 11.02. If action is required from the IRB office beyond acknowledgment of the event(s), a formal letter will be issued to the Principal Investigator. Corrective action may include, but is not limited to, suspension or termination of IRB approval (convened IRB decisions only) a re-determination of the risk level of the study modification to an approved study procedure(s) and/or the information provided during the consent process notification to current participants of relevant information reconfirming consent of current participants requiring additional monitoring for current and/or past participants monitoring of the research (including audits) and/or consent process education, training, or mentoring for the principal investigator and/or research team members modification to the continuing review schedule 4) Considerations for Additional Reporting Where outside entities, or funding agencies/sponsors are involved with the research, additional reporting of the event(s) and any subsequent actions may be required or desired and should seek to be made in a timely manner. PI s should consult with the IRB office prior to making a report to outside entities.

Page 5 of 5 5. References OHRP Guidance on Reviewing and Reporting Unanticipated Problems involving risks to subjects or others: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/advevntguid.html 45 CFR 46.103(b)(5) 21 CFR 56.108(b) UNLV Rules and Procedures for Conducting Human Subjects Research 5.4.3