Abstract
Federal laws and regulations, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996, intended primarily to protect individuals, have been described as significant barriers to the use of clinical registries and other population-based tools for health care research. Although these regulations allow for the waiver or alteration of usual consent procedures when the research meets certain specific criteria, waivers and alterations are rarely used in health care research. The Vermont Diabetes Information System is a multistate randomized trial of a quality improvement intervention that uses a novel alteration of informed consent to help ensure that the study sample is representative of the target population. Patients are notified by mail that they are eligible for the study and that they may opt out of the study, if they desire, by calling a toll-free number. Seven thousand five hundred and fifty-eight patients were invited to participate. Two hundred and ten (2.8%) opted out. Three patients (0.04%) filed complaints, all of which were addressed satisfactorily. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and other federal regulations raise challenges to the use of clinical registries in research, but modifications to the consent process, including passive consent methods, are useful tools to overcome these challenges. It is possible to recruit a broad and representative population under current law while maintaining appropriate protections for research subjects.
MeSH Terms
Diabetes Mellitus/therapy
Ethics, Medical
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act/legislation & jurisprudence
Humans
Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence
Presumed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence
Registries
Third-Party Consent/legislation & jurisprudence
United States
Vermont
Authors & Affiliations
2 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Littenberg Benjamin
Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, VT 05401, USA.
[email protected]
MacLean Charles D
References (14)
14 references, click to expand
-
Medical privacy and medical research.
N Engl J Med. 2002 May 23;346(21):1674
PMID: 12024008
-
HIPAA regulations - a new era of medical-record privacy?
N Engl J Med. 2003 Apr 10;348(15):1486-90
PMID: 12686707
-
The new federal medical-privacy rule.
N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 10;347(15):1133-4
PMID: 12374872
-
US privacy laws may curb access to medical data.
Nature. 1997 Apr 10;386(6625):533
PMID: 9121564
-
Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the chronic care model, Part 2.
JAMA. 2002 Oct 16;288(15):1909-14
PMID: 12377092
-
Registries and informed consent.
N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 5;351(6):612-4; author reply 612-4
PMID: 15295059
-
Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations: effect on medical record research.
Ann Surg. 2004 Jun;239(6):772-6; discussion 776-8
PMID: 15166956
-
Potential impact of the HIPAA privacy rule on data collection in a registry of patients with acute coronary syndrome.
Arch Intern Med. 2005 May 23;165(10):1125-9
PMID: 15911725
-
The Vermont Diabetes Information System (VDIS): study design and subject recruitment for a cluster randomized trial of a decision support system in a regional sample of primary care practices.
Clin Trials. 2004;1(6):532-44
PMID: 16279294
-
Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness.
JAMA. 2002 Oct 9;288(14):1775-9
PMID: 12365965
-
Variations among Institutional Review Board reviews in a multisite health services research study.
Health Serv Res. 2005 Feb;40(1):279-90
PMID: 15663713
-
Impracticability of informed consent in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network.
N Engl J Med. 2004 Apr 1;350(14):1414-21
PMID: 15070791
-
Problematic variation in local institutional review of a multicenter genetic epidemiology study.
JAMA. 2003 Jul 16;290(3):360-6
PMID: 12865377
-
Survey of informed consent for registration of congenital anomalies in Europe.
BMJ. 2005 Jul 16;331(7509):140-1
PMID: 16020855