Literature DB >> 21921594

Ischemic stroke survivors' opinion regarding research utilizing exception from informed consent.

Dawn Kleindorfer1, Christopher J Lindsell, Kathleen Alwell, Daniel Woo, Matthew L Flaherty, Jane Eilerman, Pooja Khatri, Opeolu Adeoye, Simona Ferioli, Brett M Kissela.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: 'Exception from informed consent for research' (EFIC) is a rigorous procedure regulated by the FDA that requires community assent but allows enrollment without patient or family consent. Recently, several acute stroke trials have explored the use of EFIC to improve enrollment. We obtained ischemic stroke survivors' opinions regarding hypothetical enrollment into a clinical trial at the time of their stroke without personal or proxy consent.
METHODS: During 2005, 460 ischemic stroke patients (or their proxy) who met case criteria were prospectively interviewed and followed. After 2 years, patients were asked to think back to the time of their stroke and indicate whether they would have wished to be enrolled in an acute stroke research study before individual or proxy consent could be obtained, understanding that consent would be sought as soon as possible thereafter, and they rated how agreeable they would have been to acute stroke research with different levels of invasiveness. Predictors of a positive opinion regarding the hypothetical research were analyzed using logistic regression. Variables included in the model were age, race, sex, education, initial NIHSS, modified Rankin Scale prior to stroke and 30 days after stroke, and proxy versus patient responder.
RESULTS: At 2 years after stroke, after excluding patient deaths, missing data or refusals, there were 194 patient/proxy responses included in this analysis. Overall, 72-79% of responses were favorable for chart review or blood draw without consent. The proportions answering agreeably to questions about medications or invasive strategies were smaller (62.9 and 59.8%). Older subjects were less likely to offer an agreeable response regarding use of medications [OR 0.97 per year (95% CI 0.94-0.99)] and invasive procedures [OR 0.97 per year (95% CI 0.94-0.99)]. Nonblacks tended to be more agreeable than blacks to invasive procedures. Men had twice the odds of being agreeable to blood draws than women.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the majority of interviewed ischemic stroke patients were agreeable to being enrolled in acute stroke research with exception from informed consent, although the rates of agreement were lower than we expected among a cohort of patients who had already agreed to research. Older subjects, black race, and women were less likely to agree to blood draws or treatment strategies.
Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21921594      PMCID: PMC3712812          DOI: 10.1159/000328815

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis        ISSN: 1015-9770            Impact factor:   2.762


  14 in total

1.  Predictors of awareness of clinical trials and feelings about the use of medical information for research in a nationally representative US sample.

Authors:  Margaret Brown; Anne Moyer
Journal:  Ethn Health       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.772

2.  A brief educational intervention may increase public acceptance of emergency research without consent.

Authors:  Joshua N Goldstein; Kate E Delaney; Andrea J Pelletier; Jonathan Fisher; Phillip G Blanc; Mark Halsey; Daniel J Pallin; Carlos A Camargo
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 1.484

3.  Attitudes of emergency department patients and visitors regarding emergency exception from informed consent in resuscitation research, community consultation, and public notification.

Authors:  Katie B McClure; Nicole M DeIorio; Mary D Gunnels; Maria J Ochsner; Michelle H Biros; Terri A Schmidt
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.451

Review 4.  Conducting stroke research with an exception from the requirement for informed consent.

Authors:  Brian T Bateman; Philip M Meyers; H Christian Schumacher; Sundeep Mangla; John Pile-Spellman
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2003-03-27       Impact factor: 7.914

5.  Exception from informed consent enrollment in emergency medical research: attitudes and awareness.

Authors:  Wayne Triner; Liva Jacoby; Wayne Shelton; Mathew Burk; Samual Imarenakhue; James Watt; Gregory Larkin; Glenn McGee
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.451

6.  Using the exception from informed consent regulations in research.

Authors:  Vincent N Mosesso; David C Cone
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.451

7.  Retrospective assessment of initial stroke severity with the NIH Stroke Scale.

Authors:  L S Williams; E Y Yilmaz; A M Lopez-Yunez
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 7.914

8.  Ethical issues of informed consent in acute stroke. Analysis of the modalities of consent in 56 patients enrolled in urgent therapeutic trials.

Authors:  Geneviève Demarquay; Laurent Derex; Norbert Nighoghossian; Patrice Adeleine; Frédéric Philippeau; Jérôme Honnorat; Paul Trouillas
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2005-01-11       Impact factor: 2.762

9.  Who will consent to emergency treatment trials for subarachnoid hemorrhage?

Authors:  Angela Del Giudice; Justin Plaum; Eileen Maloney; Scott E Kasner; Peter D Le Roux; Jill M Baren
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 3.451

Review 10.  Impact of informed consent requirements on cardiac arrest research in the United States: exception from consent or from research?

Authors:  G Nichol; E Huszti; J Rokosh; A Dumbrell; J McGowan; L Becker
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 5.262

View more
  8 in total

1.  Exception from informed consent for emergency research: consulting the trauma community.

Authors:  Carrie A Sims; Joshua A Isserman; Daniel Holena; Latha Mary Sundaram; Nikolai Tolstoy; Sarah Greer; Seema Sonnad; Jose Pascual; Patrick Reilly
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.313

Review 2.  Trials using deferred consent in the emergency setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of stakeholders' attitudes.

Authors:  Aran Fitzpatrick; Fiona Wood; Victoria Shepherd
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 2.728

3.  Which factors influence the resort to surrogate consent in stroke trials, and what are the patient outcomes in this context?

Authors:  Anne-Marie Mendyk; Julien Labreuche; Hilde Henon; Marie Girot; Charlotte Cordonnier; Alain Duhamel; Didier Leys; Régis Bordet
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  Effect of informed consent on patient characteristics in a stroke thrombolysis trial.

Authors:  Götz Thomalla; Florent Boutitie; Jochen B Fiebach; Claus Z Simonsen; Norbert Nighoghossian; Salvador Pedraza; Robin Lemmens; Pascal Roy; Keith W Muir; Christoph Heesen; Martin Ebinger; Ian Ford; Bastian Cheng; Tae-Hee Cho; Josep Puig; Vincent Thijs; Matthias Endres; Jens Fiehler; Christian Gerloff
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 9.910

5.  SCING-Spinal Cord Injury Neuroprotection with Glyburide: a pilot, open-label, multicentre, prospective evaluation of oral glyburide in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury in the USA.

Authors:  Amy Janelle Minnema; A Mehta; Warren W Boling; Jan Schwab; J Marc Simard; H Francis Farhadi
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Protecting study participants in emergency research: is community consultation before trial commencement enough?

Authors:  Blair Henry; Adic Perez; Sandy Trpcic; Sandro Rizoli; Barto Nascimento
Journal:  Trauma Surg Acute Care Open       Date:  2017-07-12

7.  Emergency Consent: Patients' and Surrogates' Perspectives on Consent for Clinical Trials in Acute Stroke and Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Neal W Dickert; Victoria M Scicluna; Opeolu Adeoye; Dominick J Angiolillo; James C Blankenship; Chandan M Devireddy; Michael R Frankel; Sara F Goldkind; Gautam Kumar; Yi-An Ko; Andrea R Mitchell; Raul G Nogueria; Ruth M Parker; Manesh R Patel; Michele Riedford; Robert Silbergleit; Candace D Speight; Ilana Spokoyny; Kevin P Weinfurt; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 5.501

8.  Patient and surrogate attitudes via an interviewer-administered survey on exception from informed consent enrollment in the Prehospital Air Medical Plasma (PAMPer) trial.

Authors:  Insiyah Campwala; Francis X Guyette; Joshua B Brown; Peter W Adams; Barbara J Early; Mark H Yazer; Matthew D Neal; Brian S Zuckerbraun; Jason L Sperry
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2020-10-01
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.