Refining the Enrolment Process in Emergency Medicine Research.

Kate M Sahan, Keith M Channon, Robin P Choudhury, Rajesh K Kharbanda, Regent Lee, Mark Sheehan
{"title":"Refining the Enrolment Process in Emergency Medicine Research.","authors":"Kate M Sahan, Keith M Channon, Robin P Choudhury, Rajesh K Kharbanda, Regent Lee, Mark Sheehan","doi":"10.5083/ejcm.20424884.147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research in the emergency setting involving patients with acute clinical conditions is needed if there are to be advances in diagnosis and treatment. But research in these areas poses ethical and practical challenges. One of these is the general inability to obtain informed consent due to the patient's lack of mental capacity and insufficient time to contact legal representatives. Regulatory frameworks which allow this research to proceed with a consent 'waiver', provided patients lack mental capacity, miss important ethical subtleties. One of these is the varying nature of mental capacity among emergency medicine patients. Not only is their capacity variable and often unclear, but some patients are also likely to be able to engage with the researcher and the context to varying degrees. In this paper we describe the key elements of a novel enrolment process for emergency medicine research that refines the consent waiver and fully engages with the ethical rationale for consent and, in this context, its waiver. The process is verbal but independently documented during the 'emergent' stages of the research. It provides appropriate engagement with the patient, is context-sensitive and better addresses ethical subtleties. In line with regulation, full written consent for on-going participation in the research is obtained once the emergency is passed.</p>","PeriodicalId":75000,"journal":{"name":"The European journal of cardiovascular medicine","volume":"4 1","pages":"506-510"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975512/pdf/emss-68476.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European journal of cardiovascular medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5083/ejcm.20424884.147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research in the emergency setting involving patients with acute clinical conditions is needed if there are to be advances in diagnosis and treatment. But research in these areas poses ethical and practical challenges. One of these is the general inability to obtain informed consent due to the patient's lack of mental capacity and insufficient time to contact legal representatives. Regulatory frameworks which allow this research to proceed with a consent 'waiver', provided patients lack mental capacity, miss important ethical subtleties. One of these is the varying nature of mental capacity among emergency medicine patients. Not only is their capacity variable and often unclear, but some patients are also likely to be able to engage with the researcher and the context to varying degrees. In this paper we describe the key elements of a novel enrolment process for emergency medicine research that refines the consent waiver and fully engages with the ethical rationale for consent and, in this context, its waiver. The process is verbal but independently documented during the 'emergent' stages of the research. It provides appropriate engagement with the patient, is context-sensitive and better addresses ethical subtleties. In line with regulation, full written consent for on-going participation in the research is obtained once the emergency is passed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
完善急诊医学研究的注册流程。
要想在诊断和治疗方面取得进展,就必须在急诊环境中开展涉及急性临床症状患者的研究。但是,这些领域的研究面临着伦理和实际挑战。其中一个挑战是,由于病人缺乏心智能力,也没有足够的时间联系法律代表,因此一般无法获得知情同意。监管框架允许在病人缺乏精神行为能力的情况下,在 "放弃 "同意的情况下进行这项研究,但却忽略了重要的伦理微妙之处。其中之一就是急诊科病人的精神行为能力各不相同。不仅他们的行为能力参差不齐,而且往往不明确,有些病人还可能在不同程度上能够与研究人员和研究环境互动。在本文中,我们介绍了一种新颖的急诊医学研究注册流程的关键要素,该流程完善了同意弃权,并充分考虑了同意的伦理依据,以及在这种情况下同意弃权的伦理依据。在研究的 "紧急 "阶段,该过程是口头的,但有独立的记录。它能让患者适当参与,对具体情况有敏感认识,并能更好地解决伦理方面的微妙问题。根据规定,一旦紧急情况过去,将获得继续参与研究的完全书面同意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Association of N-terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide with Haemoglobin and Ferritin in Heart Failure Patients Bronchogenic Cyst Associated with an Ostium Secundum Atrial Septal Defect in a One and Half Month Infant: Is it the Youngest Patient Yet Late Complete Heart Block after Surgical Repair of an Atrial Septal Defect Myocarditis with Biventricular Dysfunction Caused by Parvovirus B19 – A case report Correlation between Body Mass Index and Radiation Dose in Patients Undergoing Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1