What is the Sunshine Act?

260 views

Published on

Sunshine Act Reporting and your IRB Members.

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
260
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
14
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

What is the Sunshine Act?

  1. 1. Quorum Blog quorumreview.com/sunshine-act-reporting-irb-members/ What is the Sunshine Act? Over the past seven months, the clinical research community has worked to meet its f irst reporting deadline under the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. The intent of the Sunshine Act, part of the Af f ordable Care Act, was to provide more inf ormation about the nature of payments made by pharmaceutical companies to active doctors. Under the act, pharmaceutical sponsors must report regularly what kind of payments they have made to doctors. The f irst reporting period ran f rom August 2013 to March 31, 2014. The provided inf ormation will be available this autumn f or public view. (Inf ormation about the Sunshine Act is widely available on the web; here are links to the government website; to the American Medical Association’s discussion; and a May 2013 New England Journal of Medicine article). IRB payments to board members do not fall under the Sunshine Act In the run up to the March deadline, a number of independent IRBs received requests to report on the f ees paid to scientif ic members of their boards. Some interpretations of the regulations suggested that since sponsors pay independent IRBs, and some independent IRBs pay board members, then the f ees received should be reported under the Sunshine Act. Af ter collaborative research, discussion, and analysis, Quorum along with eight other independent IRBs concluded that those stipends did not f all under the Sunshine Acts reporting requirements. Why doesn’t an IRB’s payments to board members fall under the Sunshine
  2. 2. Act? The reasoning boiled down to a three-part argument: 1. The work f or which IRB members are paid does not match the work the Sunshine Act seeks to report; 2. Neither are the payments to IRBs the types of f ees the Sunshine Act asks f or; and 3. IRB members already f ace strict restrictions about any conf licts of interest that relate to their work. The Consortium of Independent Review Boards (CIRB) issued this analysis on behalf of its members and other independent IRBs. On the f irst point, CIRB noted that the Sunshine Act calls f or reporting on actions that involve the practice of medicine. Members of an IRB review medical research; they are not practicing medicine (or endorsing drugs or procedures, the target of the Sunshine Act). The task of reading and analyzing how a proposal f or research will af f ect the people participating in the study was not the kind of work the Sunshine Act sought to track. (While most IRBs have medical doctors on their boards, this is not a specif ic regulatory requirement. The regulations call f or ‘scientif ic members. And a physician board member may be retired, involved solely in research, work administration, or have careers other than seeing patients.) On the second point, IRB review is a required f eature of most research that using human subjects. According to f ederal regulations, sponsors and investigators must have IRB oversight f or most research that will involve people. But engaging an IRB does not mean that a certain physician –or even any physician—will review that particular protocol. As a result, payments f or IRB oversight do not trigger directly payments to practicing doctors, and so the type of payment is outside what the Sunshine Act requires. On the third point, existing f ederal guidelines prohibit IRB members f rom reviewing research in which they may have a conf lict of interest. IRBs must ensure that any members, physicians or otherwise, have no inf luencing interest in a particular study. (IRBs have varied ways of managing their conf lict of interest policies, such as regular f inancial reporting, and recusing members f rom voting on anything that represents—or creates the impression of –a conf lict of interest. In addition, IRBs which maintain accreditation agree to establish strict conf lict of interest procedure that go beyond the letter of the regulations.) How can I get more information? The independent IRBs who collaborated on this response can provide the document to anyone interested, as well as standard language f or contracts or services agreements. If you’d like a copy of this document, click here to request a copy f rom Quorum Review.

×