RESUMO
ABSTRACT: Institutional radiation safety committees review research studies with radiation exposure. However, ensuring that the potential patient benefit and knowledge gained merit the radiation risks involved often necessitates revisions that inadvertently delay protocol activations. This quality-improvement study analyzed protocols, identified factors associated with approval time by a radiation safety committee, and developed guidelines to expedite reviews without compromising quality. Clinical protocols submitted to the University of Pennsylvania's Radiation Research Safety Committee (RRSC) for review between 2017 and 2021 were studied. Protocol characteristics, review outcome, stipulations, and approval times were summarized. Statistical analysis (Spearman's rho) was used to investigate stipulations and approval time; rank-sum analysis (Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon) was used to determine whether approval time differed by protocol characteristics. One hundred ten (110) protocols were analyzed. Approximately two-thirds of protocols used approved radiopharmaceuticals to aid investigational therapy trials. Twenty-three percent (23%) of protocols received RRSC approval, and 73% had approval withheld with stipulations, which included requests for edits or additional information. Submissions had a median of three stipulations. Median and mean RRSC approval times were 62 and 80.1 d, and 41% of protocols received RRSC approval after IRB approval. RRSC approval time was positively correlated with stipulations (Spearman's rho = 0. 632, p < 0.001). RRSC approval time was longer for studies using investigational new drugs (median 80 d) than approved radiopharmaceuticals (median 57 d, p = 0.05). The review process is lengthy and may benefit from changes, including publishing standardized radiation safety language and commonly required documents and encouraging timely response to stipulations.