Marin M Arnolds1,2, Dalia M Feltman1,2. 1. Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Evanston Hospital, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL. 2. Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives were to discover current practices of informed consent for bedside procedures in the PICU and neonatal ICU and how trainees learn to obtain consent. We also attempted to gauge if program directors felt that one method of consent was subjectively superior to another in the way it fulfilled established ethical criteria for informed consent. DESIGN: An online anonymous survey. Participants were asked about how and by whom informed consent is currently obtained, training practices for fellows, and attitudes about how different consent methods fulfill ethical criteria. SETTING: All U.S. fellowship programs for neonatology (n = 98) and pediatric critical care (n = 66) in the fall of 2017. SUBJECTS: Neonatal and pediatric critical care fellowship program directors. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The overall response rate was 50% (82 of 164). The most common method for obtaining consent in both ICU types was via a written, separate (procedure-specific) consent (63% neonatal ICUs, 83% PICUs); least common was verbal consent (8% neonatal ICUs and 6% PICUs). Fellows were reported as obtaining consent most often (91%), followed by mid-level practitioners (71%) and residents (66%). Residents were one-fifth as likely to obtain consent in the PICU as compared with the neonatal ICU. Sixty-three percent of fellowship directors rated their programs as "strong" or "very strong" in preparing trainees to obtain informed consent. Twenty-eight percent of fellowship directors reported no formal training on how to obtain informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents' ICUs use separate procedure-specific written consents for common bedside procedures, although considerable variability exists. Trainees reportedly most often obtain informed consent for procedures. Although most fellowship directors report their program as strong in preparing trainees to obtain consent, this study reveals areas warranting improvement.
OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives were to discover current practices of informed consent for bedside procedures in the PICU and neonatal ICU and how trainees learn to obtain consent. We also attempted to gauge if program directors felt that one method of consent was subjectively superior to another in the way it fulfilled established ethical criteria for informed consent. DESIGN: An online anonymous survey. Participants were asked about how and by whom informed consent is currently obtained, training practices for fellows, and attitudes about how different consent methods fulfill ethical criteria. SETTING: All U.S. fellowship programs for neonatology (n = 98) and pediatric critical care (n = 66) in the fall of 2017. SUBJECTS: Neonatal and pediatric critical care fellowship program directors. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The overall response rate was 50% (82 of 164). The most common method for obtaining consent in both ICU types was via a written, separate (procedure-specific) consent (63% neonatal ICUs, 83% PICUs); least common was verbal consent (8% neonatal ICUs and 6% PICUs). Fellows were reported as obtaining consent most often (91%), followed by mid-level practitioners (71%) and residents (66%). Residents were one-fifth as likely to obtain consent in the PICU as compared with the neonatal ICU. Sixty-three percent of fellowship directors rated their programs as "strong" or "very strong" in preparing trainees to obtain informed consent. Twenty-eight percent of fellowship directors reported no formal training on how to obtain informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents' ICUs use separate procedure-specific written consents for common bedside procedures, although considerable variability exists. Trainees reportedly most often obtain informed consent for procedures. Although most fellowship directors report their program as strong in preparing trainees to obtain consent, this study reveals areas warranting improvement.