How are protocols handled if designated members can neither all agree on approval nor modifications?

When designated members of an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) cannot reach a consensus on either approval or necessary modifications for a research protocol, the standard procedure is to escalate the review process to a full committee meeting. This approach ensures that all members have the opportunity to discuss the protocol in detail.

The rationale behind moving to full committee review is to enhance the rigor and collaborative nature of the decision-making process. Full committee review allows for a more comprehensive evaluation of the protocol, including diverse opinions and expertise from all committee members. This is particularly important in instances where there are conflicting views or concerns regarding animal welfare or research ethics that require broader input to arrive at a well-rounded decision.

In contrast, options such as approving with conditions, outright rejection, or deferral may not adequately address the complexities or concerns raised by the designated members and thus do not facilitate the most thorough review process.