2 dq responses needed now--follow directions please.

  With the obesity epidemic, the rising concern for Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) and Type 2 Diabetes   is rising, as well. Researchers suggest using Chromium as a dietary

supplement with counseling to try to improve IGT and prevent Type 2 Diabetes. In order to doso researcher’s wanted to recruit subjects with IGT. They wanted to compare subjects using

Chromium and counseling with those subjects using just counseling. (Yale University)

In order to get recruits, researchers requested Internal Review Board to give them access

to the patient’s records and a waiver of The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. (HIPAA) Initially, the board Chairman granted permission. Under review of the entire board,

they revoked the initial granted permission, stating it violated the patients right to privacy. (Yale University)

However, granting a Waiver of HIPAA Research Authorization clearly is a breach of patient’s privacy, it is sometimes granted for certain research. A HIPAA Waiver is not given if

 certain criteria is not met. The final decision statutes that it was rejected because researchers did not prove the research could not  be done without the patient’s PHI. (Yale University)

            I agree with this decision because HIPAA protects patients personal and sensitive information from people who want access for whatever reason. Granted, Information is needed

for researchers to conduct studies to better find cures for diseases and other medical issues. There are other ways to get the information without, basically, going behind peoples backs. One  way for recruitment could be conducted through a licensed health care professional discussing the with the patient the possibility enrolling in a case study. This information could be passed on to  the research team. (Schonfeld, Brown, Amoura, Gordon, 2011)

            Private information should be kept private. If it is to be used for research, it should be plainly visible on any patient form when the patient is admitted so they can practice their given right  to accept or deny the offer to participate. There should be certain strict guidelines that need to be met in order to get a Waiver of HIPAA Research Authorization for release of information to  conduct research.

I have option one, which is an IRB (Institutional Review Board) case study from Yale University. Case 4: Public health practices vs. research. The primary role of this board is to works in the public health agencies to differentiate the dynamics of what constitutes public health practices and public health research concerning population health. In this case study a researcher, not affiliated with government health services such as Department of Health and Human Services wanted to conduct a study of those suffering from a communicable disease. In the article Progress and Setbacks in Addressing Infectious Disease (2013) states that in order to control infectious diseases, evidence based partnership have to work together with government agencies for prevention and control. The researcher proposed a request to the Department of Public Health to have permission to collect data on the patients. The researcher gave written descriptions of activates and how the process would take place.  The determination was made in favor of study with some revisions to the methods of compiling information from patients. I think this was a right decision to conduct the research/health practice because the information obtained will help health government agencies identify possible diseases and risk factors that may affect a certain population. According to Oles, Gudoska-Nowak, and Kleczkowski (2012), “The objective of preventive actions is to lower the total cost by investing e.g. in vaccination at the initial stages of the epidemic or culling of infected/susceptible individuals.”