This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Quality of Care  • Quality of Care, Other  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Bridget M. Kuehn

JAMA. 2008;299(12):1416.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

A controversial decision by the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP) that many feared would stall quality improvement studies has been reversed.

The study that prompted the initial decision was led by Peter Pronovost, MD, PhD, medical director of the Center for Innovation in Quality Patient Care at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. That study now will be allowed to continue because OHRP officials have determined that human research protections regulations no longer apply.

In December, the OHRP had ordered Pronovost and his collaborators to halt their study evaluating the use of checklists to prevent hospital-acquired blood infections in intensive care units of Michigan hospitals. The regulators claimed that the investigators had failed to comply with federal requirements for human research subjects protection. However, the researchers and many quality improvement experts were surprised by the decision because such quality improvement . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Rational Protection of Subjects in Research and Quality Improvement Activities
Goldman et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2010;61:180-183.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT