The experience of accommodating privacy restrictions during implementation of a large-scale surveillance study of an osteoporosis medication

被引:7
作者
Midkiff, Kirk D. [1 ]
Andrews, Elizabeth B. [1 ]
Gilsenan, Alicia W. [1 ]
Deapen, Dennis M. [2 ]
Harris, David H. [1 ]
Schymura, Maria J. [3 ]
Hornicek, Francis J. [4 ]
机构
[1] RTI Int, RTI Hlth Solut, Dept Pharmacoepidemiol & Risk Management, 3040 Cornwallis Rd,POB 12194, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA
[2] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Los Angeles Canc Surveillance Program, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] New York State Dept Hlth, New York State Canc Registry, Albany, NY USA
[4] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Ctr Sarcoma & Connect Tissue Oncol, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
epidemiology; oncology; postmarketing product surveillance; privacy; public health; survey; retrospective studies; pharmacoepidemiology; HEALTH RESEARCH; IMPACT; RULE; BIAS;
D O I
10.1002/pds.4008
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose To explore whether privacy restrictions developed to protect patients have complicated research within a 15-year surveillance study conducted with US cancer registries. Methods Data from enrolling 27 cancer registries over a 10-year period were examined to describe the amount of time needed to obtain study approval. We also analyzed the proportion of patients that completed a research interview out of the total reported by the registries and examined factors thought to influence this measure. Results The average length of the research review process from submission to approval of the research was 7 months (range, <1 to 24 months), and it took 6 months or more to obtain approval of the research at 41% of the cancer registries. Most registries (78%) required additional permission steps to gain access to patients for research. After adjustment for covariates, the interview response proportion was 110% greater (ratio of response proportion = 2.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.3, 3.3) when the least restrictive versus the most restrictive permission steps were required. An interview was more often completed for patients (or proxies) if patients were alive, within a year of being diagnosed, or identified earlier in the study. Conclusions Lengthy research review processes increased the time between diagnosis and provision of patient information to the researcher. Requiring physician permission for access to patients was associated with lower subject participation. A single national point of entry for use of cancer registry data in health research is worthy of consideration to make the research approval process efficient. (C) 2016 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:960 / 968
页数:9
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Bias from. requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: Prospective, population based study [J].
Al-Shahi, R ;
Vousden, C ;
Warlow, C .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 331 (7522) :942-945
[2]   The US Postmarketing Surveillance Study of Adult Osteosarcoma and Teriparatide: Study Design and Findings From the First 7 Years [J].
Andrews, Elizabeth B. ;
Gilsenan, Alicia W. ;
Midkiff, Kirk ;
Sherrill, Beth ;
Wu, Yun ;
Mann, Beth H. ;
Masica, Daniel .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH, 2012, 27 (12) :2429-2437
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2004, MED RES LAW POLICY
[4]   Potential impact of the HIPAA privacy rule on data collection in a registry of patients with acute coronary syndrome [J].
Armstrong, D ;
Kline-Rogers, E ;
Jani, SM ;
Goldman, EB ;
Fang, JM ;
Mukherjee, D ;
Nallamothu, BK ;
Eagle, KA .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2005, 165 (10) :1125-1129
[5]   The HIPAA authorization form and effects on survey response rates, nonresponse bias, and data quality - A randomized community study [J].
Beebe, Timothy J. ;
Talley, Nicholas J. ;
Camilleri, Michael ;
Jenkins, Sarah M. ;
Anderson, Kari J. ;
Locke, G. Richard, III .
MEDICAL CARE, 2007, 45 (10) :959-965
[6]   Methodological Issues in a Retrospective Cancer Incidence Study [J].
Buchanich, Jeanine M. ;
Youk, Ada O. ;
Marsh, Gary M. ;
Bornemann, Zb ;
Lacey, Steven E. ;
Kennedy, Kathleen J. ;
Hancock, Roger P. ;
Esmen, Nurtan A. ;
Lieberman, Frank S. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 170 (01) :112-119
[7]   The role of state law in protecting human subjects of public health research and practice [J].
Burris, S ;
Gable, L ;
Stone, L ;
Lazzarini, Z .
JOURNAL OF LAW MEDICINE & ETHICS, 2003, 31 (04) :654-+
[8]   Conforming to HIPAA regulations and compilation of research data [J].
Clause, SL ;
Triller, DM ;
Bornhorst, CPH ;
Hamilton, RA ;
Cosler, LE .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH-SYSTEM PHARMACY, 2004, 61 (10) :1025-1031
[9]   COMPARABILITY OF MORTALITY FOLLOW-UP BEFORE AND AFTER THE NATIONAL DEATH INDEX [J].
EDLAVITCH, SA ;
BAXTER, J .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1988, 127 (06) :1164-1178
[10]  
Gostin L, 2009, HIPAA PRIVACY RULE E, DOI [10.17226/12458, DOI 10.17226/12458]