• 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.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.135-143
• /
• 2014

Purpose: Aim of this study was to gather and evaluate perceptions of investigators, IRB members, and IRB administrators on the appropriateness of IRB review process and bioethical oversight system of national R&D (NR&D) projects. Method: Investigators, IRB members, and IRB administrators at 17 different institutions were surveyed using convenience sampling and survey questionnaires were partially group-specialized to consider any differences between the groups. Results: Participants included 29 investigators, 37 IRB members, and 17 administrators with response rate of 100% (83 of 83). According to the responses obtained, insufficient preparation time for constructing protocol and gaining IRB approval was one of the main problems in the IRB review process (investigator 79.3%, IRB administrator 88.2%). Also, discrepancy between NR&D and IRB's protocol formats was another major issue (IRB members 96.4%, IRB administrator 100%) and most investigators (89.7%) had to modify the original NR&D protocol to obtain IRB approval. Moreover, it was reported that 13.8% of investigators and 31.3% of IRB administrators did not submit midyear reports to IRB and for bioethical issues of NR&D projects, 17.2% of investigators did not include information on project status and safety issues in the annual reports. Conclusion: In conclusion, for successful and ethical completion of R&D projects, revision of both IRB review process and NR&D project protocol formats as well as implementation of appropriate bioethical oversights are necessary.