58 - Evaluation of Virtual and In-person IRB Meetings During Calendar Year 2023 and 2024

Background: As institutional review board (IRB) meetings have been held virtually since March 2020, quality improvement (QI) activities were necessary for evaluating virtual IRB meetings, informing stakeholders, implementing changes in policies and procedures, if needed, and assessing our potential transition back to in-person IRB meetings.

Program

Description:  Following a proposal to return to in-person IRB meetings, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in 2023, and findings contributed to changes in the procedures for conducting virtual IRB meetings, including moving from 100% to 87.5% of scheduled meetings annually, and the implementation of 3 in-person meetings annually per IRB (12.5%) to facilitate team identity and networking.

During June and July 2023, ten virtual IRB meetings were observed and recorded. Data collected included the average duration of the meetings and mean time spent on review of different events (e.g., renewals, new protocols, modifications). During June 2024, five in-person IRB meetings were observed and similar data collected. Data were collected for the five February in-person meetings although the meetings were not observed. Surveys were also administered to 33 IRB members in attendance during June 2024 to gain their subjective perspectives into the advantages and disadvantages of virtual and in-person IRB meetings.

Program

Assessment: Data reflected that 164 items were reviewed at the ten virtual IRB meetings. 237 items were reviewed at the ten in-person IRB meetings and of these 237 items, 123 items were reviewed at the five in-person IRB meetings during June 2024. Average duration of meetings and review time for event types were calculated and compared as a quantitative measure of length of discussion. The duration of in-person IRB meetings were longer, on average, and had a greater mean number of agenda items compared to that of the virtual IRB meetings. While longer average review times for some types of events at virtual meetings are not conclusive in terms of reflecting more robust discussion, they indicated the need for collection of qualitative data such as opinions from IRB members.

In the survey responses, about half of IRB members, 15/27, stated that they preferred virtual meetings and the majority of the IRB members listed “convenience” and “less participation” as an advantage and disadvantage of virtual IRB meetings, respectively.
 

Limitations: A major limitation of this initiative includes the small number of virtual and in-person IRB meetings observed. Only one in-person IRB meeting per IRB was witnessed, whereas two virtual meetings per IRB were observed. Other limitations include that the complexity of review items could not be accounted for when evaluating the different review times, and only the IRB members that were present at the in-person IRB meetings completed the survey.

Discussion:  Longer average review times for some events during virtual IRB meetings may be due to shorter agendas during the allotted time for the meeting.

The results of this program have informed changes for how IRB meetings are held and meeting procedures, such as for voting and keeping cameras on. Surveying IRB members’ perspectives was a valuable tool to provide assessment of meetings. In the future, we will solicit their thoughts more frequently for other initiatives to improve efficiency and effectiveness of meetings. This program has general relevance as a mechanism for institutions to conduct ongoing QI of IRB meetings.