|
KMID : 1161620200020020037
|
|
Journal of KAIRB
2020 Volume.2 No. 2 p.37 ~ p.48
|
|
|
Survey of Operation and Status of the Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) in Korea (2019)
|
|
Maeng Chi-Hoon
Lee Sun-Ju
Cho Sung-Ran
Kim Jin-Seok
Rha Sun-Young
Kim Yong-Jin
Chung Jong-Woo
Kim Seung-Min
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the operational status and level of understanding among IRB and HRPP staffs at a hospital or a research institute to the HRPP guideline set by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and to provide recommendations.
Methods: Online survey was distributed among members of Korean Association of IRB (KAIRB) through each IRB office. The result was separated according to topic and descriptive statistics was used for analysis.
Result: Survey notification was sent out to 176 institutions and 65 (37.1%) institutions answered the survey by online. Of 65 institutions that answered the survey; 83.1% was hospital, 12.3% was university, 3.1% was medical college, 1.5% was research institution. 23 institutions (25.4%) established independent HRPP offices and 39 institutions (60.0%) did not. 12 institutions (18.5%) had separate IRB and HRPP heads, 21 (32.3%) institutions separated business reporting procedure and person in charge, 12 institutions separated the responsibility of IRB and HRPP among staff, and 45 institutions (69.2%) had audit & non-compliance managers. When asked about the most important basic task for HRPP, 23% answered self-audit. And according to 43.52%, self-audit was also the most by both institutions that operated HRPP and institutions that did not. When basic task performance status was analyzed, on average, the institutions that operated HRPP was 14% higher than institutions that only operated IRB. 9 (13.8%) institutions were evaluated and obtained HRPP accreditation from MFDS and the most common reason for obtaining the accreditation was to be selected as Institution for the education of persons conducting clinical trial (6 institutions). The most common reason for not obtaining HRPP accreditation was because of insufficient staff and limited capacity of the institution (28%). Institutions with and without a plan to be HRPP accredited by MFDS were 20 (37.7%) each. 34 institutions (52.3%) answered HRPP evaluation method and accreditation by MFDS was appropriate while 31 institutions (47.7%) answered otherwise. 36 institutions answered that HRPP evaluation and accreditation by MFDS was credible while 29 institutions (44.5%) answered that HRPP evaluation method and accreditation by MFDS was not credible.
Conclusion: 1. MFDS’s HRPP accreditation program can facilitate the main objective of HRPP and MFDS’s HRPP accreditation program should be encouraged to non-tertiary hospitals by taking small staff size into consideration and issuing accreditation by segregating accreditation. 2. While issuing Institution for the education of persons conducting clinical trial status as a benefit of MFDS’s HRPP accreditation program, it can also hinder access to MFDS’s HRPP accreditation program. It should also be considered that the non-contact culture during COVID-19 pandemic eliminated time and space limitation for education. 3. For clinical research conducted internally by an institution, internal audit is the most effective and sole method of protecting safety and right of the test subjects and integrity for research in Korea. For this reason, regardless of the size of the institution, an internal audit should be enforced. 4. It is necessary for KAIRB and MFDSto improve HRPP awareness by advocating and educating the concept and necessity of HRPP in clinical research. 5. A new HRPP accreditation system should be setup for all clinical research with human subjects, including Investigational New Drug (IND) application in near future.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Human Research Protection Program (HRPP), Accreditation, IRB (Institutional Review Board)
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|
|