Location of Repository

Ethical issues in implementation research: a discussion of the problems in achieving informed consent

By Jane Hutton, Martin P. Eccles and Jeremy M. Grimshaw

Abstract

Background: Improved quality of care is a policy objective of health care systems around the world. Implementation research is the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of clinical research findings into routine clinical practice, and hence to reduce inappropriate\ud care. It includes the study of influences on healthcare professionals' behaviour and methods to enable them to use research findings more effectively. Cluster randomized trials represent the optimal design for evaluating the effectiveness of implementation strategies. Various codes of\ud medical ethics, such as the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki inform medical research, but their relevance to cluster randomised trials in implementation research is unclear. This paper discusses the applicability of various ethical codes to obtaining consent in cluster trials in implementation research.\ud Discussion: The appropriate application of biomedical codes to implementation research is not obvious. Discussion of the nature and practice of informed consent in implementation research cluster trials must consider the levels at which consent can be sought, and for what purpose it can be sought. The level at which an intervention is delivered can render the idea of patient level\ud consent meaningless. Careful consideration of the ownership of information, and rights of access to and exploitation of data is required. For health care professionals and organizations, there is a balance between clinical freedom and responsibility to participate in research.\ud Summary: While ethical justification for clinical trials relies heavily on individual consent, for\ud implementation research aspects of distributive justice, economics, and political philosophy underlie the debate. Societies may need to trade off decisions on the choice between individualized consent and valid implementation research. We suggest that social sciences codes could usefully inform the consideration of implementation research by members of Research Ethics Committees

Topics: R1
Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd.
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:520

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1999). AJ: Ethical issues in the design and conduct of cluster randomised controlled trials. Brit Med J doi
  2. (2001). Are distinctive ethical principles required for cluster randomised controlled trials? Statist Med doi
  3. (2000). Ashcroft RE: Some popular versions of uninformed consent. Health Care Anal
  4. (2000). Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects doi
  5. (1999). Association: Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice doi
  6. (2004). C: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess doi
  7. (1999). Challenges to Human Subject Protections in doi
  8. (2004). Co-payments for prescription drugs and the demand for doctor visits-Evidence from a natural experiment. Health Econ doi
  9. (2002). confidentiality, and the threat to public health surveillance. doi
  10. (2002). Council of the International Organisation of Medical Sciences: International Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects
  11. (2007). D: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of a Diabetes REcall And Management system: the DREAM Trial. Implementation Science doi
  12. (1989). Ed: The ethics of educational research Lewes: The Falmer Press;
  13. Ethical aspects of information technology.
  14. Ethics and tactics: issues arising from an educational survey.
  15. (2001). Ethics: a very short introduction Oxford:
  16. (2005). Evaluation of Nationally Mandated Drug Use Reviews to Improve Patient Safety in Nursing Homes: A Natural Experiment strategy. doi
  17. (2003). From best evidence to best practice; about effective implementation of change in patient care. Lancet doi
  18. (2000). Giving Medicine a Fair Trial. doi
  19. (1997). Hutton JL: Implication of socio-cultural contexts for the ethics of clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment
  20. (2002). I: Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial. doi
  21. (2004). Impracticability of Informed consent in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. New Eng J Med doi
  22. (1997). Informed consent in medical research: journals should not publish research to which patients have not given fully informed consent-with three exceptions. Brit Med J doi
  23. (2004). Obstacles to conducting epidemiological research in the UK general population. Brit Med J
  24. (2001). Principles of Biomedical Ethics Oxford:
  25. (1997). Professional ethics and the teacher: towards a General Teaching Council Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham;
  26. (2004). Public attitudes towards the use of primary care patient record data in medical research without consent: a qualitative study. doi
  27. (2005). Recruiting patients to medical research: double-blind randomised trial of 'opt-in' versus 'opt-out' strategies. BMJ doi
  28. (2003). Research designs for studies evaluating the effectiveness of change and improvement strategies. Qual Safety Health Care doi
  29. (2001). S: Effect of audit and feedback, and reminder messages on primary-care radiology referrals: a randomised trial. Lancet doi
  30. (2000). Selection bias from requiring patients to give consent to examinst data for Health Services Research. Arch Fam Med doi
  31. (2001). series: Personal Information in Medical Research. [New guidance on Health and Social Care Act
  32. (1993). Society: Code of Conduct London: The Royal Statistical Society; doi
  33. (2001). The British Sociological Association: Statement of Ethical Practice.
  34. (2004). The effect of early epidural versus early intravenous analgesia use on labor progression: A natural experiment. doi
  35. (1947). The Nuremberg Code: doi
  36. (2006). Using personal health information in medical research. doi
  37. (2006). Wessely S: Consent, confidentiality, and the Data Protection Act. Brit Med J
  38. (2000). What proportion of patients refuse consent to data collection from their records for research purposes? Br J Gen Pract
  39. (2001). Why does primary care need more implementation research? Family Practice doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.