Exempting low-risk health and medical research from ethics reviews: Comparing Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands

Background: Disproportionate regulation of health and medical research contributes to research waste. Better understanding of exemptions of research from ethics review in different jurisdictions may help to guide modification of review processes and reduce research waste. Our aim was to identify examples of low-risk human health and medical research exempt from ethics reviews in Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands. Methods: We examined documents providing national guidance on research ethics in each country, including those authored by the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), National Health Service (United Kingdom), the Office for Human Research Protections (United States) and the Central Committee on Research Involving Humans (the Netherlands). Examples and types of research projects exempt from ethics reviews were identified, and similar examples and types were grouped together. Results: Nine categories of research were exempt from ethics reviews across the four countries; these were existing data or specimen, questionnaire or survey, interview, post-marketing study, evaluation of public benefit or service programme, randomised controlled trials, research with staff in their professional role, audit and service evaluation, and other exemptions. Existing non-identifiable data and specimens were exempt in all countries. Four categories - evaluation of public benefit or service programme, randomised controlled trials, research with staff in their professional role, and audit and service evaluation - were exempted by one country each. The remaining categories were exempted by two or three countries. Conclusions: Examples and types of research exempt from research ethics reviews varied considerably. Given the considerable costs and burdens on researchers and ethics committees, it would be worthwhile to develop and provide clearer guidance on exemptions, illustrated with examples, with transparent underpinning rationales

Paediatric biobanking: Dutch experts reflecting on appropriate legal standards for practice

Large sets of data and human specimens, such as blood, tumour tissue and DNA, are deposited in biobanks for research purposes, preferably for long periods of time and with broadly defined research aims. Our research focuses on the retention of data and biological materials obtained from children. However important such paediatric biobanks may be, the privacy interests of the children involved and the related risks may not be ignored. The privacy issues arising from paediatric biobanks are the central focus of this article. We first review the international regulations that apply to biobanks and then summarise viewpoints expressed by experts in a round-table discussion. We confine ourselves here to two normative questions: (1) How much control should children's parents or legal representatives, and later the children themselves, have over the stored materials and data? (2) What should be done if research findings emerge that have serious implications for a child's health? On the basis of international legal standards and the views of experts, involved in paediatric biobanking, we argue that biological material of children may only be stored in a biobank for scientific purposes if parents provide their explicit consent, the child is re-contacted at 16 or 18 years of age to reconsider storage and use of its material, and the biobank maintains a limited policy in disclosure of individual research findings to the child's parents. What is Known: • Increasingly, biological material of children is stored in biobanks for research purposes. • Clear standards on the conditions under which children's cells or tissues may be stored and used are lacking. What is New: • According to experts, storage and use of children's materials should only be allowed if performed in accordance with appropriate consent procedures and feedback policie

A genetic researcher’s devil’s dilemma:Warn relatives about their genetic risk or respect confidentiality agreements with research participants?

Background: With advances in sequencing technologies, increasing numbers of people are being informed about a genetic disease identified in their family. In current practice, probands (the first person in a family in whom a genetic predisposition is identified) are asked to inform at-risk relatives about the diagnosis. However, previous research has shown that relatives are sometimes not informed due to barriers such as family conflicts. Research on family communication in genetic diseases aims to explore the difficulties encountered in informing relatives and to identify ways to support probands in this. Main body: Research on family communication may also reveal that participants did not inform their relatives about the risk of a serious genetic condition, even when preventive and treatment options are available. Researchers may then face a dilemma: Do they need to warn at-risk relatives about the finding? Or do they keep silent due to prior confidentiality agreements with study participants? Conclusions: We believe that the absolute confidence promised to research participants outweighs the interests of their relatives, even though it can be claimed that relatives at risk of a genetic disease do, in principle, have a right to know information collected about their health. Not respecting confidentiality agreements could cause distrust between researchers and research participants and possibly harm the relationship between probands and relatives. Relatives' health interests can still be taken into account without jeopardizing participant trust, by considering alternative scenarios, including sharing general study findings on the barriers participants experience with their healthcare professionals and by offering participants psychosocial support for family communication

Making embryos for research:First prohibited, now allowed?

The Dutch Embryos Act (2000) contains a temporary ban on the creation of embryos for research, meaning that, at present, only research using "spare" IVF embryos is allowed. Recently, the government has announced a plan to lift this ban. This is in line with the original intention of the Act, which already contains conditions for research with specially created embryos that will come into force after the lifting of the ban, including the restriction that the research must be expected to yield new insights in the domains of infertility, assisted reproduction, hereditary or congenital disorders, or transplantation medicine. The government plans announced allow research only in the first three of these domains, adding the further criterion that the research must be 'directly relevant for clinical application'. According to the government, the reason for these additional restrictions was the need to protect 'human dignity'. The authors of this paper are not convinced

Making embryos for research:First prohibited, now allowed?

The Dutch Embryos Act (2000) contains a temporary ban on the creation of embryos for research, meaning that, at present, only research using "spare" IVF embryos is allowed. Recently, the government has announced a plan to lift this ban. This is in line with the original intention of the Act, which already contains conditions for research with specially created embryos that will come into force after the lifting of the ban, including the restriction that the research must be expected to yield new insights in the domains of infertility, assisted reproduction, hereditary or congenital disorders, or transplantation medicine. The government plans announced allow research only in the first three of these domains, adding the further criterion that the research must be 'directly relevant for clinical application'. According to the government, the reason for these additional restrictions was the need to protect 'human dignity'. The authors of this paper are not convinced

Indirect X-ray detectors based on inkjet-printed photodetectors with a screen-printed scintillator layer

Organic photodetectors (PDs) based on printing technologies will allow to expand the current field of PD applications toward large-area and flexible applications in areas such as medical imaging, security, and quality control, among others. Inkjet printing is a powerful digital tool for the deposition of smart and functional materials on various substrates, allowing the development of electronic devices such as PDs on various substrates. In this work, inkjet-printed PD arrays, based on the organic thin-film transistor architecture, have been developed and applied for the indirect detection of X-ray radiation using a scintillator ink as an X-ray absorber. The >90% increase of the photocurrent of the PDs under X-ray radiation, from about 53 nA without the scintillator film to about 102 nA with the scintillator located on top of the PD, proves the suitability of the developed printed device for X-ray detection applicationsThe authors thank FEDER funds through the COMPETE 2020 Programme and National Funds through FCT-Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology under Strategic Funding UID/FIS/04650/2013 and projects PTDC/EEI-SII/5582/2014, PTDC/CTM-ENE/5387/2014 and in the framework of EuroNanoMed 2016 call, Project LungChek ENMed/0049/2016. J.O. and V.C. thank the FCT for the SFRH/BD/98219/2013 and SFRH/BPD/97739/2013 grants, respectively. The authors acknowledge funding by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) through the project MAT2016-76039-C4-3-R. Financial support from the Basque Government Industry Department under the ELKARTEK program is also acknowledged. The authors thank Iain McCulloch and Martin Heeney from Flexink for providing the OSC. Dirk Rittrich (Department Layer Deposition at Fraunhofer ENAS) is acknowledged for the FIB/SEM analysis and the sample preparation. R.D.R acknowledges the DFG Unit FOR1317 SMINT, the Cluster of Excellence, and the Tomsk Polytechnic University Competitiveness Enhancement Program grant TPU CEP_IHTP_73\2017. This work was performed in the context of the European COST Action MP1302 Nanospectroscopy.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Complaints handling in hospitals: an empirical study of discrepancies between patients' expectations and their experiences

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many patients are dissatisfied with the way in which their complaints about health care are dealt with. This study tested the assumption that this dissatisfaction consists – in part at least – of unmet expectations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects were 279 patients who lodged a complaint with the complaints committees of 74 hospitals in the Netherlands. They completed two questionnaires; one on their expectations at the start of the complaints handling process, and one on their experiences after the complaints procedure (pre-post design; response 50%). Dependent variables are patients' satisfaction and their feeling that justice was done; independent variables are the association between patients' expectations and their experiences.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Only 31% of the patients felt they had received justice from the complaints process.</p> <p>Two thirds of the patients were satisfied with the conduct of the complaints committee, but fewer were satisfied with the conduct of the hospital or the medical professional (29% and 18%). Large discrepancies between expectations and experiences were found in the case of doctors not admitting errors when errors had been made, and of hospital managements not providing information on corrective measures that were taken. Discrepancies collectively explained 51% of patients' dissatisfaction with the committee and one third of patients' dissatisfaction with the hospital and the professional. The feeling that justice was done was influenced by the decision on the complaint (well-founded or not), but also by the satisfaction with the conduct of the committee, the hospital management and the professional involved.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is disappointing to observe that less than one third of the patients felt that justice had been done through the complaints handling process. This study shows that the feeling that justice had been done is not only influenced by the judgement of the complaints committee, but also by the response of the professional. Furthermore, hospitals and professionals should communicate on how they are going to prevent a recurrence of the events that led to the complaint.</p

Benefits and problems of electronic information exchange as perceived by health care professionals: an interview study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Various countries are currently implementing a national electronic patient record (n-EPR). Despite the assumed positive effects of n-EPRs, their overall adoption remains low and meets resistance from health care providers. This study aims to increase our understanding of health care providers' attitude towards the n-EPR, by investigating their perceptions of the benefits and problems of electronic information exchange in health care and the n-EPR in particular.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study was conducted in three Dutch health care settings: acute care, diabetes care, and ambulatory mental health care. Two health care organisations were included per setting. Between January and June 2010, interviews were conducted with 17 stakeholders working in these organisations. Relevant themes were deduced by means of thematic qualitative analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Health care providers perceived electronic information exchange to promote the efficiency and quality of care. The problems they perceived in electronic information exchange mainly concerned the confidentiality and safety of information exchange and the reliability and quality of patient data. Many problems perceived by health care providers did not specifically apply to the n-EPR, but to electronic information exchange in general.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The implementation of the Dutch n-EPR has mainly followed a top-down approach, thereby neglecting the fact that the perceptions and preferences of its users (health care providers) need to be addressed in order to achieve successful implementation. The results of this study provide valuable suggestions about how to promote health care providers' willingness to adopt electronic information exchange, which can be useful for other countries currently implementing an n-EPR. Apart from providing information about the benefits and usefulness of electronic information exchange, efforts should be focused on minimising the problems as perceived by health care providers. The safety and confidentiality of electronic information exchange can be improved by developing tools to evaluate the legitimacy of access to electronic records, by increasing health care providers' awareness of the need to be careful when using patient data, and by measures to limit access to sensitive patient data. Improving health care providers' recording behaviour is important to improve the reliability and quality of electronically exchanged patient data.</p

Next-generation sequencing-based genome diagnostics across clinical genetics centers: Implementation choices and their effects

Implementation of next-generation DNA sequencing (NGS) technology into routine diagnostic genome care requires strategic choices. Instead of theoretical discussions on the consequences of such choices, we compared NGS-based diagnostic practices in eight clinical genetic centers in the Netherlands, based on genetic testing of nine pre-selected patients with cardiomyopathy. We highlight critical implementation choices, including the specific contributions of laboratory and medical specialists, bioinformaticians and researchers to diagnostic genome care, and how these affect interpretation and reporting of variants. Reported pathogenic mutations were consistent for all but one patient. Of the two centers that were inconsistent in their diagnosis, one reported to have found 'no causal variant', thereby underdiagnosing this patient. The other provided an alternative diagnosis, identifying another variant as causal than the other centers. Ethical and legal analysis showed that informed consent procedures in all centers were generally adequate for diagnostic NGS applications that target a limited set of genes, but not for exome- and genome-based diagnosis. We propose changes to further improve and align these procedures, taking into account the blurring boundary between diagnostics and research, and specific counseling options for exome- and genome-based diagnostics. We conclude that alternative diagnoses may infer a certain level of 'greediness' to come to a positive diagnosis in interpreting sequencing results. Moreover, there is an increasing interdependence of clinic, diagnostics and research departments for comprehensive diagnostic genome care. Therefore, we invite clinical geneticists, physicians, researchers, bioinformatics experts and patients to reconsider their role and position in future diagnostic genome care