Log in | Register

Medical research in emergency research in the European Union member states: tensions between theory and practice

Erwin J. O. Kompanje| Andrew I. R. Maas| David K. Menon| Jozef Kesecioglu
Review
Volume 40, Issue 4 / April , 2014

Pages 496 - 503

Abstract

In almost all of the European Union member states, prior consent by a legal representative is used as a substitute for informed patient consent for non-urgent medical research. Deferred (patient and/or proxy) consent is accepted as a substitute in acute emergency research in approximately half of the member states. In 12 European Union member states emergency research is not mentioned in national law. Medical research in the European Union is covered by the Clinical Trial Directive 2001/20/EC. A proposal for a regulation by the European Commission is currently being examined by the European Parliament and the Council and will replace Directive 2001/20/EC. Deferred patient and/or proxy consent is allowed in the proposed regulation, but does not fit completely in the practice of emergency research. For example, deferred consent is only possible when legal representatives are not available. This criterion will delay inclusion of patients in acute life-threatening conditions in short time frames. As the regulation shall be binding in its entirety in all member states, emergency research in acute situations is still not possible as it should be.

Keywords

References

  1. European Union (2012) Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on clinical trails on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC. COM(2012) 369 final, 2012/0192 (COD)
  2. Visser HKA (2001) Non-therapeutic research in the EU in adults incapable of giving consent? Lancet 357:818–819
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  3. Bayens AJ (2002) Implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive: pitfalls and benefits. Eur J Health Law 9:31–47
  4. Sterz F, Singer EA, Böttiger B, Chamberlain D, Baskett P, Bossaert L, Steen P (2002) A serious threat to evidence based resuscitation within the European Union. Resuscitation 53:237–238
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  5. Lemaire FJP (2003) A European Directive for clinical research. Intensive Care Med 29:1818–1820
  6. Kompanje EJO, Maas AIR (2004) ‘Treat first, ask later?’ Emergency research in acute neurology and neurotraumatology in the European Union. Intensive Care Med 30:168–169
  7. Silvermann HJ, Druml C, Lemaire F, Nelson R (2004) The European Union directive and the protection of incapacitated subjects in research: an ethical analysis. Intensive Care Med 30:1723–1729
  8. Druml C (2004) Informed consent of incapable (ICU) patients in Europe: existing laws and the EU Directive. Curr Opin Crit Care 10:570–573
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  9. Lemaire F, Bion J, Blanco J, Damas P, Druml C, Falke K, Kesecioglu J, Larsson A, Mancebo J, Matamis D, Pesenti A, Pimentel J, Ranieri M (2005) The European Union Directive on clinical research: present status of implementation in EU member states’ legislations with regard to the incompetent patient. Intensive Care Med 31:476–479
  10. Wiedermann CJ, Almici M, Mangione S, Giarratono A, Mayr O (2006) Clinical research in Italy in adult patients unable to consent: after implementation of the European Union’s Directive 2001/20/EC. Intensive Care Med 33:316–318
  11. Liddell K, Kompanje EJO, Lemaire F, Vrhovac B, Menon DK, Bion J, Chamberlain D, Wiedermann CJ, Druml C (2006) Recommendations in relation to the EU clinical trials directive and medical research involving incapacitated adults. Wien Klin Wochenschr 118:183–191
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  12. Liddell K, Chamberlain D, Menon DK, Bion J, Kompanje EJO, Lemaire F, Druml C, Vrhovac B, Widermann CJ, Sterz F (2006) The European clinical trials directive revisited: the VISEAR recommendations. Resuscitation 69:9–14
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  13. Lewis RJ, Duber HC, Biros MH, Cone DC (2009) International resuscitation research, exception from informed consent, and the European Union Directive 2001/20/EC. Eur J Emerg Med 16:234–241
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  14. Kompanje EJO, Maas AIR, Slieker FJA, Stocchetti N (2007) Ethical implications of time frames in a randomized controlled trial in acute severe traumatic brain injury. Prog Brain Res 161:243–250
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  15. Gamble C, Woolfall K, Williamson P, Appleton R, Young B (2013) New European Union regulation of clinical trials is conflicting on deferred consent in emergency situations. BMJ 346:f667
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  16. Matei M, Kompanje EJO, Maas AIR, Menon DK, Lemaire F (2013) Clinical research into the ICU: clouds at the horizon, once again. Intensive Care Med. doi:10.1007/s00134-013-2974-0
    • View reference on PubMed
  17. Weijer C, Miller PB (2004) When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits? Nature Med 10(6):570–573
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  18. Weijer C, Miller PB (2007) Evaluating benefits and harms in intensive care research. Intensive Care Med 33:1819–1822
  19. Liddell K, Bion J, Chamberlain D, Druml C, Kompanje EJO, Lemaire F, Menon D, Vrhovac B, Wiedermann CJ (2006) Medical research involving incapacitated adults: implications of the EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC. Med Law Rev 14:367–417
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  20. Roupie E, Santin A, Boulme R et al (2000) Patients preferences concerning medical information and surgery: results of a prospective study in a French emergency department. Intensive Care Med 26:52–56
  21. Sulmasy DP, Haller K, Terry PB (1994) More talk, less paper: predicting the accuracy of substituted judgments. Am J Med 96:432–438
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  22. Coppolino M, Ackerson L (2001) Do surrogate decision makers provide accurate consent for intensive care research? Chest 119:603–612
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  23. Mason S, Barrow H, Phillips A et al (2006) Brief report on the experience of using proxy consent for incapacitated adults. J Med Ethics 32:61–62
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  24. Ciroldi M, Cariou A, Adrie C et al (2007) Ability of family members to predict patient’s consent to critical care research. Intensive Care Med 33:807–813
  25. Sugarman J (2000) Is the emperor really wearing new clothes? Informed consent for acute coronary syndromes. Am Heart J 140:2–3
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  26. Ditto PH, Danks JH, Smucker WD et al (2001) Advance directives as acts of communication: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 161:421–430
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  27. Matheis-Kraft C, Roberto KA (1997) Influence of a values discussion on congruence between elderly women and their families on critical health care decisions. J Women Aging 9:5–22
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  28. Potter JE, MaKinley S, Delaney A (2013) Research participants’ opinions of delayed consent for a randomized controlled trial of glucose control in intensive care. Intensive Care Med 39:472–480
  29. Barrett KA, Ferguson ND, Athaide V et al (2012) Surrogate decision makers’ attitudes towards research decision making for critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 38:1616–1623
  30. Mehta S, Quittnat Pelletier F, Brown M et al (2012) Why substitute decision makers provide or decline consent for ICU research studies: a questionnaire study. Intensive Care Med 38:46–54
  31. Hsieh M, Dailey MW, Calloway CW (2001) Surrogate consent by family members for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest research. Acad Emerg Med 8:851–853
    • View reference on PubMed
    • View reference on publisher's website
  32. Kucia AM, Horowitz JD (2000) Is informed consent to clinical trials an ‘upside selective’ process in acute coronary syndromes? Am Heart J 139:94–97
    • View reference on publisher's website
  33. Woolley N (1990) Crisis theory: a paradigm of effective intervention with families of critically ill people. J Adv Nursing 15:1402–1408
    • View reference on publisher's website
  34. Jansen TC, Kompanje EJO, Bakker J (2009) Deferred consent in emergency critical care research: ethically valid and practically feasible. Crit Care Med 37(Suppl):S65–S68

Sign In

Connect with ICM

Top 5 Articles Editors Picks Supplement