Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Intensive Care Medicine 11/2006

01-11-2006 | Editorial

The European Directive 2001/20 for clinical research: friend or foe?

Author: François Lemaire

Published in: Intensive Care Medicine | Issue 11/2006

Login to get access

Excerpt

In their contribution to Intensive Care Medicine Veelo et al. [1] show how a recent modification to the Dutch law on research humans will, or at least could, improve inclusions in clinical trials. The new provision allows family members to act as legal representatives for granting consent/assent in case the patient is himself incapacitated, whereas the previous legislation restricted that possibility only to the spouse. Such a strange limitation had raised an outcry in the medical community, as described in this journal by Kesecioglu et al. [2]. Apparently the lobbying by our Dutch colleagues toward their policymakers proved efficient, which is a good news to all the European investigators still fighting against inadequate, if not inept, provisions in their own national legislations. It is worth remembering that these new hurdles are not always imposed by the implementation of EU directives and other Brussels “guidance” but by national policymakers. The other important information in their contribution is that patients interviewed as to how they felt about their representatives gave them unequivocally good ratings. This confirms similar findings recently reported in this journal by British investigators [3]. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Veelo D, Spronk P, Kuiper M, Korevaar J, van der Voort P, Schultz M (2006) A change in the Dutch Directive on medical research involving human subjects strongly increases the number of eligible intensive care patients: an observational study. Intensive Care Med DOI 10.1007/s00134-006-0384-2 Veelo D, Spronk P, Kuiper M, Korevaar J, van der Voort P, Schultz M (2006) A change in the Dutch Directive on medical research involving human subjects strongly increases the number of eligible intensive care patients: an observational study. Intensive Care Med DOI 10.​1007/​s00134-006-0384-2
2.
go back to reference van Dijk Y, van der Voort P, Kuiper M, Kesecioglu J (2003) Research on subjects incapable of giving consent: the situation in Dutch intensive care departments. Intensive Care Med 20:2100–2101CrossRef van Dijk Y, van der Voort P, Kuiper M, Kesecioglu J (2003) Research on subjects incapable of giving consent: the situation in Dutch intensive care departments. Intensive Care Med 20:2100–2101CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Harvey SE, Elbourne D, Ashcroft J, Jones C, Rowan K (2006) Informed consent in clinical trials in crtitical care: experience from the PAC-man study. Intensive Care Med Harvey SE, Elbourne D, Ashcroft J, Jones C, Rowan K (2006) Informed consent in clinical trials in crtitical care: experience from the PAC-man study. Intensive Care Med
5.
go back to reference Meunier F, Lacombe C (2003) European organisation for research and treatment of cancer's point of view. Lancet 362:663PubMedCrossRef Meunier F, Lacombe C (2003) European organisation for research and treatment of cancer's point of view. Lancet 362:663PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Lemaire F, Bion J, Blanco J, Damas P, Druml C, Falke K, Kesecioglu J, Larsson A, Mancebo A, Matamis D, Pesenti A, Pimentel J, Ranieri M (2005) The EU directive on clinical research: present status of implementation in EU member states legislations with regard to the incompetent patient. Intensive Care Med 31:476–479PubMedCrossRef Lemaire F, Bion J, Blanco J, Damas P, Druml C, Falke K, Kesecioglu J, Larsson A, Mancebo A, Matamis D, Pesenti A, Pimentel J, Ranieri M (2005) The EU directive on clinical research: present status of implementation in EU member states legislations with regard to the incompetent patient. Intensive Care Med 31:476–479PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Menon DK, Liddell K (2004) Consent for research. J Intensive Care Soc 5:98–99 Menon DK, Liddell K (2004) Consent for research. J Intensive Care Soc 5:98–99
8.
go back to reference Coats TJ, Shakur H (2005) Consent in emergency research: new regulations. Emerg Med J 22:683–685PubMedCrossRef Coats TJ, Shakur H (2005) Consent in emergency research: new regulations. Emerg Med J 22:683–685PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Sprumont D (1999) Legal protection of human research subjects in Europe. Eur J Health Law 6:25–43PubMedCrossRef Sprumont D (1999) Legal protection of human research subjects in Europe. Eur J Health Law 6:25–43PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Grimes DA, Hubacher D, Nanda K, Schulz KF, Moher D, Altman DG (2005) The good clinical practice guideline: a bronze standard for clinical research. Lancet 366:172–174PubMedCrossRef Grimes DA, Hubacher D, Nanda K, Schulz KF, Moher D, Altman DG (2005) The good clinical practice guideline: a bronze standard for clinical research. Lancet 366:172–174PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lemaire F, Brun-Buisson C (2000) Are institutional review boards effective in safeguarding patients in ICU? Curr Op 13:195–201 Lemaire F, Brun-Buisson C (2000) Are institutional review boards effective in safeguarding patients in ICU? Curr Op 13:195–201
12.
Metadata
Title
The European Directive 2001/20 for clinical research: friend or foe?
Author
François Lemaire
Publication date
01-11-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine / Issue 11/2006
Print ISSN: 0342-4642
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0386-0

Other articles of this Issue 11/2006

Intensive Care Medicine 11/2006 Go to the issue