Open AccessInformed consent in critically ill adults participating to a randomized trial
Author(s) -
Guinchard Milène,
WarpelinDecrausaz Loane,
Schindler Kaspar,
Rüegg Stephan,
Oddo Mauro,
Novy Jan,
Alvarez Vincent,
Rossetti Andrea O.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
brain and behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.915
H-Index - 41
ISSN - 2162-3279
DOI - 10.1002/brb3.1965
Subject(s) - waiver , informed consent , generalizability theory , medicine , randomized controlled trial , clinical trial , willingness to accept , research ethics , intervention (counseling) , family medicine , psychology , psychiatry , law , alternative medicine , political science , surgery , willingness to pay , developmental psychology , pathology , economics , microeconomics
Objective The 2014 update of the Swiss law on research increases patients' protection; it adds specific requirements for emergency situations, implying an active search for patients' wishes regarding research participation; the possibility of consent waivers is not clearly stated. We explored its practical impact in a RCT on critically ill adults. Methods We considered prospectively collected consents of a multicenter trial addressing the impact of continuous EEG on survival. We assessed the proportions of consents obtained strictly according to the law, of specific waivers for this study obtained from the IRB (early death; relatives' unavailability despite repeated attempts), and the yield of retrieving statements on willingness to research participation. We compared the proportion of consent refusals with those of recent trials in similar environments, and estimated the potential impact on study results. Results Of 402 recruited patients, six had double inclusions, one died before intervention, and 27 (6.7%, alive on long‐term) were excluded following consent refusal or withdrawal, leaving 368 analyzable patients. Specific waivers allowed inclusion of 134 (36.4%) patients, while informed consents were obtained for all others. A statement of willingness to research participation was found in only 14.1%. In recent trials, consent refusal oscillated between 0%–23%, according to different waiver policies. Conclusions Consent waivers should be specifically foreseen to prevent losing a potentially relevant proportion of patients reaching endpoints, and ensure results generalizability. The yield of looking for willingness to research participation seems low; this questions its current usefulness and calls for a public awareness campaign.