Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
Published in: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Care | Original research

Barriers and challenges in the process of including critically ill patients in clinical studies

Authors: Jørgen Dahlberg, Camilla Eriksen, Annette Robertsen, Sigrid Beitland

Published in: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Clinical research in severely ill or injured patients is required to improve healthcare but may be challenging to perform in practice. The aim of this study was to analyse barriers and challenges in the process of including critically ill patients in clinical studies.

Methods

Data from critically ill patients considered for inclusion in an observational study of venous thromboembolism in Norway were analysed. This included quantitative and qualitative information from the screening log, consent forms and research notes.

Results

Among 279 eligible critically ill patients, 204 (73%) were omitted from the study due to challenges and barriers in the inclusion process. Reasons for omission were categorised as practical in 133 (65%), medical in 31 (15%), and legal or ethical in 40 (20%) of the patients. Among 70 included patients, 29 (41%) consents were from patients and 41 (59%) from their next of kin. Several challenges were described herein; these included whether patients were competent to give consent, and which next of kin that should represent the patient. Furthermore, some included patients were unable to recall what they have consented, and some appeared unable to separate research from treatment.

Conclusions

Barriers and challenges in the inclusion process led to the omission of near three out of four eligible patients. This analysis provided information about where the problem resides and may be solved. The majority of challenges among included patients were related to issues of autonomy and validity of consent.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03405766).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
El-Menyar A, Asim M, Latifi R, Al-Thani H. Research in emergency and critical care settings: debates, Obstacles and Solutions. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016;22:1605–26.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Burns KE, Zubrinich C, Tan W, Raptis S, Xiong W, Smith O, et al. Research recruitment practices and critically ill patients. A multicenter, cross-sectional study (the consent study). Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187:1212–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Pattison N, Arulkumaran N, Humphreys S, Walsh T. Exploring obstacles to critical care trials in the UK: a qualitative investigation. J Intensive Care Soc. 2017;18:36–46.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Matei M, Lemaire F. Intensive care unit research and informed consent: still a conundrum. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187:1164–6.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Estella A. Ethics research in critically ill patients. Med Int. 2018;42:247–54.
6.
Modra LJ, Hilton A, Hart GK. Informed consent for procedures in the intensive care unit: ethical and practical considerations. Crit Care Resusc. 2014;16:143–8.PubMed
7.
Rincon F, Lee K. Ethical considerations in consenting critically ill patients for bedside clinical care and research. J Intensive Care Med. 2015;30:141–50.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Ecarnot F, Quenot JP, Besch G, Piton G. Ethical challenges involved in obtaining consent for research from patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Ann Transl Med. 2017;5:S41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Schenker Y, Meisel A. Informed consent in clinical care: practical considerations in the effort to achieve ethical goals. JAMA. 2011;305:1130–1.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zamperetti N, Piccinni M, Bellomo R, Citerio G, Mistraletti G, Gristina G, et al. How to protect incompetent clinical research subjects involved in critical care or emergency settings. Minerva Anestesiol. 2016;82(4):479–85.PubMed
11.
Gillett GR. Intensive care unit research ethics and trials on unconscious patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2015;43(3):309–12.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Flanagan BM, Philpott S, Strosberg MA. Protecting participants of clinical trials conducted in the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med. 2011;26(4):237–49.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Richmond TS, Ulrich C. Ethical issues of recruitment and enrollment of critically ill and injured patients for research. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2007;18(4):352–5.PubMed
14.
Tonelli MR, Misak CJ. Compromised autonomy and the seriously ill patient. Chest. 2010;137:926–31.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Tunzi M. Can the patient decide? Evaluating patient capacity in practice. Am Fam Physician. 2001;64:299–306.PubMed
16.
Williams BF, French JK, White HD, Investigat H-CS. Informed consent during the clinical emergency of acute myocardial infarction (HERO-2 consent substudy): a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2003;361:918–22.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Harvey SE, Elbourne D, Ashcroft J, Jones CM, Rowan K. Informed consent in clinical trials in critical care: experience from the PAC-man study. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:2020–5.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Berg RMG, Moller K, Rossel PJH. An ethical analysis of proxy and waiver of consent in critical care research. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013;57:408–16.PubMedCrossRef
19.
20.
Schmidt TA, Salo D, Hughes JA, Abbott JT, Geiderman JM, Johnson CX, et al. Confronting the ethical challenges to informed consent in emergency medicine research. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1082–9.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Jansen TC, Bakker J, Kompanje EJO. Inability to obtain deferred consent due to early death in emergency research: effect on validity of clinical trial results. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36:1962–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Dobb GJ. Research without informed patient consent in incompetent patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2015;43(3):313–6.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Burns KEA, Zubrinich C, Marshall J, Cook D. The 'Consent to Research' paradigm in critical care: challenges and potential solutions. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:1655–8.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Smith OM, McDonald E, Zytaruk N, Foster D, Matte A, Clarke F, et al. Enhancing the informed consent process for critical care research: strategies from a thromboprophylaxis trial. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2013;29:300–9.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Burns KEA, Prats CJ, Maione M, Lanceta M, Zubrinich C, Jeffs L, et al. The experience of surrogate decision makers on being approached for consent for patient participation in research a multicenter study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14(2):238–45.PubMed
26.
Gigon F, Merlani P, Chenaud C, Ricou B. ICU research: the impact of invasiveness on informed consent. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(7):1282–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Larkin ME, Beauharnais CC, Magyar K, Macey L, Grennan KB, Boykin EE, et al. Obtaining surrogate consent for a minimal-risk research study in the intensive care unit setting. Clin Trials. 2013;10(1):93–6.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Chenaud C, Merlani P, Verdon M, Ricou B. Who should consent for research in adult intensive care? Preferences of patients and their relatives: a pilot study. J Med Ethics. 2009;35(11):709–12.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Beitland S, Wimmer H, Lorentsen T, Jacobsen D, Draegni T, Brunborg C, et al. Venous thromboembolism in the critically ill: a prospective observational study of occurrence, risk factors and outcome. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2019;63:630–8.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Garde A, O'Hearn K, Nicholls S, Menon K. Reporting of consent rates in critical care studies: room for improvement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;74:51–6.PubMedCrossRef
31.
van Beinum A, Hornby L, Dhanani S, Ward R, Chambers-Evans J, Menon K. Feasibility of conducting prospective observational research on critically ill, dying patients in the intensive care unit. J Med Ethics. 2017;43:47–51.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Henry B, Scales DC. Ethical challenges in conducting research on dying patients and those at high risk of dying. Account Res. 2012;19(1):1–12.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Dotolo D, Nielsen EL, Curtis JR, Engelberg RA. Strategies for enhancing family participation in research in the ICU: findings from a qualitative study. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2017;54(2):226–30.CrossRef
34.
Appelbaum PS. Clinical practice. Assessment of patients' competence to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1834–40.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Etchells E, Sharpe G, Elliott C, Singer PA. Bioethics for clinicians: 3. Capacity CMAJ. 1996;155:657–61.PubMed
36.
Etchels E. Aid to Capacity Evaluation (ACE). Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto. Canada: University of Oslo, Centre for Medical Ethics; 2011.
37.
Laura L, Sessums J, Zembrzuska H, Jackson JL. Does this patient have medical decision-making capacity? JAMA. 2011;306:420–7.CrossRef
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Newman JT, Smart A, Reese TR, Williams A, Moss M. Surrogate and patient discrepancy regarding consent for critical care research. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:2590–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
Sharma RK, Hughes MT, Nolan MT, Tudor C, Kub J, Terry PB, et al. Family understanding of seriously-ill patient preferences for family involvement in healthcare decision making. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26:881–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Bruce CR, Liang C, Blumenthal-Barby JS, Zimmerman J, Downey A, Pham L, et al. Barriers and facilitators to initiating and completing time-limited trials in critical care. Crit Care Med. 2015;43:2535–43.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Barriers and challenges in the process of including critically ill patients in clinical studies
Authors
Jørgen Dahlberg
Camilla Eriksen
Annette Robertsen
Sigrid Beitland
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-020-00732-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 1/2020 Go to the issue

Original research

Prediction of mortality in critically-ill elderly trauma patients: a single centre retrospective observational study and comparison of the performance of trauma scores

Original research

Mechanical chest compression devices in the helicopter emergency medical service in Switzerland

Original research

Intubation during a medevac flight: safety and effect on total prehospital time in the helicopter emergency medical service system

Original research

Intubation in acute alcohol intoxications at the emergency department

Letter to the Editor

Lausanne medical dispatch centre’s response to COVID-19

Editorial

Top five research priorities in physician-provided pre-hospital critical care – appropriate staffing, training and the effect on outcomes