• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.73-78
• /
• 2013

An institutional review board (IRB) should independently safeguard the right, safety, and well-being of all clinical trial subjects. It should consist of members who are qualified and experienced to review and evaluate the science, medical aspects, and ethics of the proposed trial. They have to pursue continuing efforts to improve the standards of review. The levels of review include the full board review, expedited review, continuing review, or exempt from review, while the levels of decision-making include approval, conditional approval, deferred approval, and disapproval. Investigators must follow the approved protocols and regulations honestly, and it is the IRB's mission to audit clinical trial sites as well.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.36-41
• /
• 2022

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate how university hospital Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in Korea classify risk when reviewing clinical trial protocols. Methods: IRB experts (IRB chairman, vice chairman, IRB administrator) in the university hospitals obtaining a Human research protection program (HRPP) or IRB accreditation in Korea were asked to fill out the Google Survey from September 1, 2020 to October 10, 2020. Result: Among the 23 responder hospitals, 8 were accredited by the American Association for Human Research Protection Program (AAHRPP) and 8 were accredited by the HRPP of Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS). Seven were accredited by Forum for Ethical Review Committees in Asia and the Western Pacific or Korea National Institution for Bioethics Policy. Thirteen of 23 hospitals (56.5%) had 4 levels (less than minimal, low, moderate, high risk), 4 hospitals had 3 levels (less than, slightly over, over than minimal risk), 1 hospital had 5 levels (4 levels plus required data safety monitoring board), and 1 hospital had 2 levels (less than, over than minimal risk) risk classification system. Thirteen of 23 hospitals (56.5%) had difficulty classifying the risk levels of research protocols. Fourteen hospitals (60.9%) responded that different standards among hospitals for risk level determination associated with clinical trials will affect the subject protection. Six hospitals (26.1%) responded that it will not. Three hospitals (13.0%) responded that it will affect the beginning of the clinical trial. To resolve differences in standards between hospitals, 14 hospitals (60.9%) responded that either the Korean Association of IRB or MFDS needs to provide a guideline for risk level determination in clinical trials: 5 hospitals (21.7%) responded education for IRB members and researchers is needed; 3 hospitals (13.0%) responded that difference among institutions needs to be acknowledged; and 1 hospital (4.3%) responded that there needs to be communication among IRB, investigator, and sponsor. Conclusion: After conducting a nationwide survey on how IRB in university hospital determines risk during review of clinical trials, it is reasonable to use 4-level risk classification (less than minimal, low, moderate, high risk); the most utilized method among hospitals. Moreover, personal information and conflict of interest associated with clinical trials have to be considered when reviewing clinical trial protocols.

• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.127-132
• /
• 2023

The Incheon Medical Center Institutional Review Board (IRB), a department that reflects the characteristics of Incheon Medical Center, a medical and public institution, was established in 2013. IRB contributes to performing its role as a local accountable care hospital and protecting researchers and subjects by proving the ethics of research conducted at the medical center. So far, IRB has reviewed a total of 80 research proposals for human subject research and human-derived material research, and it currently exists as an independent department directly under the president of the medical center. This paper aims to explain the registration and preservation of IRB-related records, the maintenance of the Records Management Standard Table and related regulations, and archives, as well as to present limitations and improvements in the disclosure, utilization, and classification of records.

• Journal of Acupuncture Research
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.11-21
• /
• 2015

Objectives : To improve quality of clinical research for acupuncture and moxibustion, a guideline for clinical research protocol is needed. While developing a guideline for acupuncture and moxibustion clinical research, we reviewed the ethical and scientific aspects of protocols pointed out by the institutional review board. This will offer practical assistance to the researchers. Methods : Ethical and scientific aspects of acupuncture and moxibustion research protocols reviewed by Kyung Hee University Korean Medicine Hospital Institutional Review Board were gathered and reviewed. Results : Ethical and scientific aspects of protocol review was reported. Conclusions : The example of review will be helpful for new researchers when developing acupuncture and moxibustion clinical research protocol.

• Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.138-143
• /
• 2012

While Korea does not have any legal statement on surrogacy, treatments are carried out in practice. As a result, every Institutional Review Board (IRB) of each fertility clinic faces an ethical predicament in reviewing each case. There is a need to arrange the institutions' own standards of surrogate pregnancy procedures before the establishment of national or professional regulation. This article examines the legal, social, and medical issues of surrogacy to help IRBs to judge their cases.

• Korean Journal of Childcare and Education
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.1-17
• /
• 2018

Objective: The purpose of this paper is to understand the bioethics and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) in the social and behavioral research area through "The Bioethics and Safety Act" and to examine the IRB's present situation, roles, responsibilities, and tasks. Methods: This paper reviewed articles, materials for education, and "The Bioethics and Safety Act" related with the IRB. Results: Bioethics included all the research in the social and behavioral area, and "The Bioethics and Safety Act" has been enforced in every research projects targeting human subjects since February 2, 2013. Accoding to the law, the IRB must review the research proposals for human subjects and was introduced in social and behavioral research as a self-regulating system. At present, all the related institutions including universities must establish and run the IRB. This paper introduced the definition of bioethics, the IRB's roles and review types, the total number of registered IRB, and "The Bioethics and Safety Act". Conclusion/Implications: Both the central government and the local government have to make an effort for the establishment and settlement of the IRB system. This paper also presented some of the problems of the IRB.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.77-83
• /
• 2016

Background: Oversight on the bioethical compliance of national R&D projects or research personnel is currently conducted exclusively by IRB (Institutional Review Board) within the relevant research institute. Considering current state of affairs in Korea, there is an imperative to establish a national oversight system for bioethical compliance, conduct comprehensive oversight on bioethical compliance of national R&D projects, and enhance subject protection system. Methods: We examined opinions from researchers and IRB personnels regarding ethical oversight system on R&D projects. Additionally, we looked at IRB assessment by KAIRB (Korea Association of Institutional Review Board) in order to identify status and problems with current IRB system in Korea. Assessment was also done for four other countries (US, UK, Germany, Singapore) through in-person visits as well as surveys in writing for a total of 6 months (2012.12.1~2013.5.31). The research comprised of two aspects: system management and R&D project audit. Based on this, we examined current status and problems of the existing system in Korea and made recommendations for improvement. Results: Regulatory objectives and backgrounds of biomedical researches are different from each country due to different characteristics of bioethical oversight system. This shows that each country sets up its own regulations and procedures to fit each situation. Bioethical compliance oversight system greatly varied between the countries. From this study, it can be seen that improvement of existing procedures and oversight system or establishment of new ones are essential in Korea. Conclusion: In terms of system management, a dedicated government organization need to be established for bioethical compliance, subject protection, IRB inspection, training, evaluation, and certification of systems, and also support for IRB e-system. Regarding R&D project oversight, it is essential to confirm IRB review results before start of a research, to conduct a review on ethical aspects of research plans, and to carry out continued oversight on bioethical compliance through interim reports.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.21-32
• /
• 2023

Purspose: The purpose of this study is to examine the meaning and definition of vulnerable subjects in clinical trials in light of domestic and international regulations and guidelines, to analyze the contents of standard operation procedures (SOPs) among advanced general hospitals in Korea that conduct clinical trials, and to examine deliberation procedures for operation plans. Methods: The study examined how vulnerable research subjects were defined and described in related regulations and the classification of vulnerable research subjects presented in the IRB/HRPP SOPs of 18 clinical trial institutions, including 11 AAHRPP-accreditated general hospitals in Korea, as well as the operation of the IRB deliberation. Results: Among all domestic and international regulations and guidelines, only the The Council for International Organization of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) guidelines explain why vulnerability is related to judgments on the severity of physical, psychological, and social harm, why individuals are vulnerable, and for what reasons. However, the classification of vulnerable subjects by institutions differed from the classification by the International Conference on Harmonization-Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP). A total of the 16 institutions classified children and minors as vulnerable research subjects. 14 institutions classified subjects who cannot consent freely were classified as vulnerable subjects. 15 institutions classified sujects who can be affected by the organizational hierarchy were classified as vulnerable subjects. Subjects in emergency situations were regarded as vulnerable research subjects in 8 of institutions, while people in wards, patients with incurable diseases, and the economically poor including the unemployed were categorized as vulnerable research subjects in 7, 4, and 4 of institutions, respectively. Additionally, some research subjects were not classified as vulnerable by ICH-GCP but were classified as vulnerable by domestic institutions 15 of the institutions classified pregnant women and fetuses as vulnerable, 11 classified the elderly as vulnerable, and 6 classified foreigners as vulnerable. Conclution: The regulations and institutional SOPs classify subjects differently, which may affect subject protection. There is a need to improve IRBs' classifications of vulnerable research subjects. It is also necessary to establish the standards according to the differences in deliberation processes. Further, it is recommended to maintain a consistent review of validity, assessment of risk/benefit, and a review using checklists and spokeperson. The review of IRB is to be carried out in a manner that respects human dignity by taking into account the physical, psychological, and social conditions of the subjects.

• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.36-39
• /
• 2018

In the personalized medicine era, utilizing paraffin blocks in pathology archives for investigating human diseases has come into the limelight. This archived material with clinical data will reduce the research time and could prevent new patient recruitment to obtain tissue for research. However, the clause indicating the necessity of consent from human material providers in the Korean Bioethics and Safety Act has made the Institutional Review Board (IRB) deny permission to use paraffin blocks for research without consent, and alternatively to get the same before starting an experiment. Written consent may be waived off in studies using paraffin blocks with anonymous status or conditions not linked to personal information by applying the paragraph 3, article 16 of the current Bioethics and Safety Act. Also, the IRB should recommend researchers to preserve the blocks as medical records of patients in long-term archives.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.99-131
• /
• 2011

To strengthen the protection of human research subjects and human materials, the Korean Ministry of Health and welfare proposed the amendment bill of Bioethics and Safety Law(2010) to the Congress. It includes so many meaningful clauses. According to the bill, the scope that this act shall apply will be expended to the research involving human subjects and human materials. In the bill, there are the principles of this act; the protection of the life, health, and dignity of the human subjects, the obtaining of the adequate informed consent, the protection of the human subject's information confidentiality and the human subject's privacy, the assessment and minimizing of the risks involved and the guarantee of the safety for the human subjects, the preparation of the special protection program for the vulnerable human subjects, and so on. According to the bill, Institutional Bioethics Review Board(the same as Institutional Review Board) will be responsible for the auditing and monitoring on the research that was approved by IBRB, conducting the education program for the researchers, IBRB members and administrative staffs, preparing of the special protection program for the vulnerable human subjects, and forming the guidelines for the researchers as well as the review of the research protocols. And the State and local governments shall take necessary measures to support the expending of the social infrastructure. In addition to, IBRB will have to be assessed and to be gained the accreditation by the Korean Ministry of Health and welfare. So, if Bioethics and Safety Law is amended, it will contribute enormously to enhance the level of the human research subjects protection. Also, if this Law is amended, IBRB will play a major role for the conduct of the ethically, scientifically, and legally proper research. But now, as a matter of fact, the capability of IBRB members and IBRB office members is not enough to charge of this role because some people and some organizations does not know the importance of IBRB exactly. In spite of, IBRB shall be able to this role to protect the human subjects and to develop the level of the research On the international level. Therefore, the State, local governments and the Organization shall back up the administrative and financial terms of the IRB and IRB Office.