Double jeopardy?

Our IACUC goes over every protocol with a fine toothed comb every time it is submitted. This means protocols submitted for amendments are often issued requests for clarification in parts of the protocol that have not being amended at that time. Granted, this means our protocols undergo some incremental measure of improvement every time they come to the committee. But our PIs (who are all pretty much ON the IACUC, anyway!) sometimes get annoyed, saying, "IACUC just approved the justification of use of animals 2 months ago!! Why do I need to clarify it more NOW?"
Does your IACUC keep eyes off all but amended parts of a protocol until it comes up for annual review? Or can reviewers "have at it" every time the protocol appears for review?

Donna - our IACUC approves and may do some PAM audits that may result in a modification at times. However for the most part once a protocol is approved the review is done and our IACUC doesn't continuously review and require additional changes.


Hi, Donna-

Sometimes, our IACUC may find something that just wasn't caught in the original review. If it can be a "deal-breaker", then we may require clarifications. If it is something pretty silly, it may become just an administrative change. We try not to have our reviewers re-review parts of protocols that are not being changed (but some IACUC members seem to not be able to help themselves!). It is hard to train the members, sometime.