Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS

Background: The Australasian Maternity Outcomes Surveillance System (AMOSS) conducts surveillance and research of rare and serious conditions in pregnancy. This multi-centre population health study is considered low risk with minimal ethical impact. Objective: To describe the ethics/governance revie...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vaughan, G, Pollock, W, Peek, M, Knight, M, Ellwood, D, Homer, C, Pulver, L, McLintock, C, Ho, M, Sullivan, E
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 2012
_version_ 1797052972360794112
author Vaughan, G
Pollock, W
Peek, M
Knight, M
Ellwood, D
Homer, C
Pulver, L
McLintock, C
Ho, M
Sullivan, E
author_facet Vaughan, G
Pollock, W
Peek, M
Knight, M
Ellwood, D
Homer, C
Pulver, L
McLintock, C
Ho, M
Sullivan, E
author_sort Vaughan, G
collection OXFORD
description Background: The Australasian Maternity Outcomes Surveillance System (AMOSS) conducts surveillance and research of rare and serious conditions in pregnancy. This multi-centre population health study is considered low risk with minimal ethical impact. Objective: To describe the ethics/governance review pathway undertaken by AMOSS. Method: Prospective, descriptive study during 2009-2011 of the governance/ethical review processes required to gain approval for Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) maternity units with more than 50 births per year (n = 303) to participate in AMOSS. Results: Review processes ranged from a single application for 24 NZ sites, a single application for eligible hospitals in two Australian states, full Health Research Ethics Committee (HREC) applications for individual hospitals, through simple letters of support. As of September 2011, 46 full/expedited ethics applications, 131 site governance applications and 136 letters of support requests were made over 33 months, involving an estimated 3261 hours by AMOSS staff/investigators, and an associated resource burden by participating sites, to obtain approval to receive nonidentifiable data from 291 hospitals. Conclusion: The AMOSS research system provides an important resource to enhance knowledge of conditions that cause rare and serious maternal morbidity. Yet the highly variable ethical approval processes required to implement this study have been excessively repetitive and burdensome. This process jeopardises timely, efficient research project implementation, without corresponding benefits to research participants. The resource burden to establish research governance for AMOSS confirms the urgent need for the Harmonisation of Multi-centre Ethical Review (HoMER) to further streamline ethics/governance review processes for multi-centre research. © 2012 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2012 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T18:37:58Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:0bee4449-910c-4d42-b329-ac3c2bda5f2c
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T18:37:58Z
publishDate 2012
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:0bee4449-910c-4d42-b329-ac3c2bda5f2c2022-03-26T09:32:00ZEthical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSSJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:0bee4449-910c-4d42-b329-ac3c2bda5f2cEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2012Vaughan, GPollock, WPeek, MKnight, MEllwood, DHomer, CPulver, LMcLintock, CHo, MSullivan, EBackground: The Australasian Maternity Outcomes Surveillance System (AMOSS) conducts surveillance and research of rare and serious conditions in pregnancy. This multi-centre population health study is considered low risk with minimal ethical impact. Objective: To describe the ethics/governance review pathway undertaken by AMOSS. Method: Prospective, descriptive study during 2009-2011 of the governance/ethical review processes required to gain approval for Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) maternity units with more than 50 births per year (n = 303) to participate in AMOSS. Results: Review processes ranged from a single application for 24 NZ sites, a single application for eligible hospitals in two Australian states, full Health Research Ethics Committee (HREC) applications for individual hospitals, through simple letters of support. As of September 2011, 46 full/expedited ethics applications, 131 site governance applications and 136 letters of support requests were made over 33 months, involving an estimated 3261 hours by AMOSS staff/investigators, and an associated resource burden by participating sites, to obtain approval to receive nonidentifiable data from 291 hospitals. Conclusion: The AMOSS research system provides an important resource to enhance knowledge of conditions that cause rare and serious maternal morbidity. Yet the highly variable ethical approval processes required to implement this study have been excessively repetitive and burdensome. This process jeopardises timely, efficient research project implementation, without corresponding benefits to research participants. The resource burden to establish research governance for AMOSS confirms the urgent need for the Harmonisation of Multi-centre Ethical Review (HoMER) to further streamline ethics/governance review processes for multi-centre research. © 2012 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2012 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
spellingShingle Vaughan, G
Pollock, W
Peek, M
Knight, M
Ellwood, D
Homer, C
Pulver, L
McLintock, C
Ho, M
Sullivan, E
Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title_full Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title_fullStr Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title_full_unstemmed Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title_short Ethical issues: The multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS
title_sort ethical issues the multi centre low risk ethics governance review process and amoss
work_keys_str_mv AT vaughang ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT pollockw ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT peekm ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT knightm ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT ellwoodd ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT homerc ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT pulverl ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT mclintockc ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT hom ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss
AT sullivane ethicalissuesthemulticentrelowriskethicsgovernancereviewprocessandamoss