Issues of informed consent for intrapartum trials: a suggested consent pathway from the experience of the Release trial [ISRCTN13204258]

Gillian Vernon, Zarko Alfirevic, Andrew Weeks, Gillian Vernon, Zarko Alfirevic, Andrew Weeks

Abstract

Service users within the NHS are increasingly being asked to participate in clinical research. In Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, approximately 35% of women take part in research during their pregnancy. For many studies the consent process is simple; information is provided and signed consent is given. There is a difficulty, however, with obtaining informed consent from women in pregnancy who become eligible only when they develop unforeseen complications, especially when they occur acutely. The problem is compounded with women in labour who may be frightened, vulnerable, in pain, under the effect of opiate analgesia, or all of the above. If research to improve the care of these women is to continue, then special consent procedures are needed. These procedures must ensure that the woman's autonomy is protected whilst recognising that women under these circumstances vary enormously, both in their desire for information and their ability to comprehend it. This paper will discuss the obtaining of consent in this situation, and describe an information and consent pathway for intrapartum research which has been developed in collaboration with consumer groups as a way in which these issues can be tackled.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Front cover of the Release study newsletter.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Release study website homepage .
Figure 3
Figure 3
Consent pathway for intrapartum research.

References

    1. Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 2001. Official Journal of the European Communities.
    1. ICH GCP Guidelines Indexed Pocketbook. Surrey, UK. 2002.
    1. British Medical Association . Consent Tool Kit. second
    1. Department of Health Briefing Pack for Research Ethics Committees London. 1997.
    1. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (1975, 1983, 1989,1996) BMJ. 1964;313:1448–1449.
    1. Association for Improvements in Maternity Services, the National Childbirth Trust A Charter for Ethical Research in Maternity Care London. 1997.
    1. COREC CT Regulations – informed consent Version 11 dated 26 September 2005.
    1. East CE, Colditz PB. Women's evaluations of their experience with fetal intrapartum oxygen saturation monitoring and participation in a research project. Midwifery. 1996;12:93–97. doi: 10.1016/S0266-6138(96)90006-6.
    1. Lavender T, Walkinshaw SA, Walton I. A prospective study of women's views of factors contributing to a positive birth experience. Midwifery. 1999;15:40–46. doi: 10.1016/S0266-6138(99)90036-0.
    1. Jackson A, Henry R, Avery N, VanDerKerkhof E, Milne B. Informed consent for labor epidurals: what laboring women want to know. Can J Anesth. 2000;47:1068–1073.
    1. Spencer SA, Dawson A. Implications of informed consent for obstetric research. The Obstetrician and Gynaecologist. 2004;6:163–167. doi: 10.1576/toag.6.3.163.26999.
    1. IMAGES Intravenous MAGnesium Efficacy in Stroke
    1. Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head injury. The CRASH trial
    1. Affleck PJ, Waisel DB, Cusick JM, Van Decar T. Recall of risks following labor epidural analgesia. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 1998;10:141–144. doi: 10.1016/S0952-8180(97)00258-4.
    1. Dorantes DM, Tait AR, Naughton NN. Informed consent for obstetric anesthesia research: factors that influence parturients' decisions to participate. Anesthesia & analgesia. 2000;91:369–373. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200008000-00025.
    1. Baker L, Lavender T, Tincello D. Factors that influence women's decisions about whether to participate in research: an exploratory study. Birth. 2005;32:60–66. doi: 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2005.00346.x.
    1. Kenyon S, Dixon-Woods M. What do they know?: a content analysis of women's perceptions of trial information. BJOG. 2004;111:1341–1345.
    1. Hearnshaw H. Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study. BMJ. 2004;328:140–141. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7432.140.
    1. Wald DS. Bureaucracy of ethics applications. BMJ. 2004;329:282–283. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7460.282.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren