Patients' perceptions of research in emergency settings: A study of survivors of sudden cardiac death

被引:33
作者
Dickert, Neal W. [1 ]
Kass, Nancy E. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Emory Univ, Div Cardiol, EPICORE, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Phoebe R Berman Bioeth Inst, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
Bioethics; Emergency research; Research ethics; Informed consent; Sudden cardiac death; INFORMED-CONSENT REQUIREMENTS; COMMUNITY CONSULTATION; CLINICAL-TRIALS; PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; ARREST RESEARCH; EXCEPTION; ATTITUDES; WAIVER; ETHICS; FOOD;
D O I
10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.10.001
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Conditions such as stroke, sudden cardiac death, and major traumatic injury are major causes of morbidity and mortality, and there is a need for clinical research to improve treatment for these conditions. However, because informed consent is often impossible, research in these situations poses ethical concerns. Despite growing literature on the ethics of emergency research, little is known about the views of relevant patient populations regarding research in emergency settings conducted under an exception from informed consent (EFIC). In this qualitative study, survivors of sudden cardiac death (SCD) - recruited from an outpatient cardiology clinic in late 2005 - were asked their views on scenarios representing different types of EFIC research. Patients were generally accepting of such research, more than previous studies would have predicted. Their concerns focused primarily on study risks and benefits and less on waiving consent or randomization. EFIC research is of international importance and ethical controversy. This study represents the first attempt to assess views of SCD survivors on this type of research and one of the first to assess patients' views in-depth. Findings indica:e broad acceptance of EFIC research among this population and re-focus discussion on what risks are reasonable for non-autonomous subjects. The study also demonstrates potential for valuable input from patients regarding complicated and ethically challenging issues using a method that allows them to develop opinions on unfamiliar issues. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:183 / 191
页数:9
相关论文
共 55 条
[1]   DEFERRED CONSENT - USE IN CLINICAL RESUSCITATION RESEARCH [J].
ABRAMSON, NS ;
SAFAR, P .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1990, 19 (07) :781-784
[2]   Acting without asking: An ethical analysis of the Food and Drug Administration waiver of informed consent for emergency research [J].
Adams, JG ;
Wegener, J .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1999, 33 (02) :218-223
[3]   The research on community consultation: An annotated bibliography [J].
Baren, Jill M. ;
Biros, Michelle H. .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2007, 14 (04) :346-352
[4]   Struggling with the rule: The exception from informed consent in resuscitation research [J].
Biros, Michelle .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2007, 14 (04) :344-345
[5]   Stroke patients' preferences and values about emergency research [J].
Blixen, CE ;
Agich, GJ .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2005, 31 (10) :608-611
[6]   Public perception of emergency research: a questionnaire [J].
Booth, MG ;
Lind, A ;
Read, E ;
Kinsella, J .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2005, 22 (12) :933-937
[7]  
Brody B.A., 1995, Ethical issues in drug testing, approval, andpricing: the clot-dissolving drugs
[8]  
Burton Thomas M, 2006, Wall St J (East Ed), pA12
[10]   Public attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials [J].
Comis, RL ;
Miller, JD ;
Aldigé, CR ;
Krebs, L ;
Stoval, E .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2003, 21 (05) :830-835