Informed consent in assisted reproduction: an Ethics Committee opinion
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine
Fertility and Sterility, 5 May 2023
Summary
Informed consent is a complex topic in bioethics and clinical practice. This opinion focuses on the ethical principles underpinning the provision of informed consent for the clinical care of patients seeking fertility treatment. Although there may be an overlap in the ethical and legal requirements for informed consent, this opinion will focus specifically on the ethical requirements for informed consent. Moreover, unlike legal requirements that may vary by jurisdiction, ethical requirements are universal. Ethical analyses of informed consent also must distinguish whether the consent is for clinical care or for research, because the research goals of obtaining knowledge differ from the goals of treatment. Ethical informed consent for fertility care requires sufficient understanding on the part of the patient to make a well-reasoned decision in furtherance of their values. It is a process in which the patient is supported in developing understanding and coming to an informed, voluntary, and carefully considered decision. Best practices for this process include understanding the patient’s condition; discussing without bias the known and potential risks, benefits, and likely outcomes of available alternatives, including no treatment; eliciting the patient’s values; and considering how alternatives may or may not realize these values. Special care may need to be taken when patients are in stressful situations, such as when they may be subject to pressure from partners or family; when they lack experience with what they may undergo (such as pregnancy or childbirth); when the risks, benefits, and processes of care are difficult to explain and understand; or when their first language is not English. Ethical informed consent may also require the disclosure of information specific to a particular facility, such as conflicts of interest, prior experience, or policies that may be important to patients in making decisions about their care. Education is an important prerequisite to informed consent but is not a substitute for it…
Patient consent for medical student pelvic exams under anesthesia: an exploratory retrospective chart review
Patient consent for medical student pelvic exams under anesthesia: an exploratory retrospective chart review
Jessica A. Jushchyshyn, Lakeisha Mulugeta-Gordon, Cara Curley, Florencia Greer Polite, F. Merz
Health Sciences, 18 April 2023
Abstract
Background
Legal requirements and clinical practices of securing patient consent for medical student pelvic examinations under anesthesia (EUA) vary widely, while ethical arguments and patients’ preferences for being asked for consent are well known.
Objective
This study was performed to examine patients’ choices to permit or refuse medical student pelvic EUAs during planned gynecologic procedures.
Study Design
An exploratory retrospective chart review of electronic consent forms at a single academic medical center, using contingency table and logistic regression to explore relationships between patient and provider characteristics and consent.
Results
Electronic consent forms were downloaded for a census of 4000 patients undergoing gynecologic surgery from September 2020 through calendar year 2022 and linked to anonymized medical record information, including patient age, race, religion, and insurance carrier, along with physician name. Physicians were coded by gender, departmental affiliation, and status (attending, resident, or fellow). Of the 4000 patients, 142 (3.6%) were informed but not presented with a choice, and these patients were removed from further analysis. Of the remainder, 308 (8.0%) were asked for EUA consent more than once. Overall, of 3858 patients, 3308 (85.7%) consented every time asked and 550 (14.2%) refused or limited EUA consent at least once. Nine patients limited their consent to female students, and 2 patients refused medical student participation at all. Of the 308 asked more than once, 46 were not consistent. Exploratory multiple logistic regression analysis showed that patients identifying as Black or African American (OR=0.492, p<0.001) or Asian (OR=0.292, p<0.001), or of Moslem/Muslim/Islamic faith (OR=0.579, p=0.006) were substantially less likely to grant EUA consent than other patients. Moreover, male physicians, most of whom were attendings, were much more likely to secure consent from patients than their female colleagues (OR=2.124, p<0.001).
Conclusions
The finding that some patients are more likely than others to refuse a pelvic EUA magnifies the dignitary harm from a nonconsensual invasion of intimate bodily integrity and perpetuates the historic wrongs visited upon vulnerable people of color and religious minorities. Patient’s rights to control over their own bodies can only be respected if their physicians take seriously the ethical obligation to inform their patients and ask them for permission.
The Alendronate Conundrum: Balancing the Competing Influences for Truly Informed Consent About Drug Safety in an Era of Rapid Change
The Alendronate Conundrum: Balancing the Competing Influences for Truly Informed Consent About Drug Safety in an Era of Rapid Change
Commentary
Marcia M. Boumil, Paul R. Beninger
Clinical Therapeutics, April 2023; 45(4) pp 376-381
Abstract
This commentary highlights critical decision points regarding the responsibilities of the key stakeholders—pharmaceutical companies, the US Food and Drug Administration, clinicians, and patients—regarding the communication of the risk of a medication. It addresses responsibility for remaining current about emerging drug reactions that often cannot be appreciated during the initial approval period of new drugs and biologics. Further complicating the issue are the medical systems that limit a clinician’s time and bandwidth to keep abreast of emerging adverse reactions and to engage in an informed consent process with a lay patient who often has a limited understanding of medical terms and quantitative methods that can provide context for understanding rare complications and adverse drug reactions. Nevertheless, the risk of not finding an amenable way forward for all stakeholders is a descent into the unending crippling malpractice settlements that will only inexorably raise the costs of health care and encourage the exodus of clinicians from the profession.
Introducing Empowered Consent to Deal With the Current Challenges in Applied Sport Psychology
Introducing Empowered Consent to Deal With the Current Challenges in Applied Sport Psychology
Niels Boysen Feddersen
Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 12 May 2023
Abstract
There has been a paucity of literature discussing how to address consent procedures as part of ethics, practitioner development, and best practice in applied sport psychology. Several researchers have addressed ethical challenges (e.g., out-of-session contact, overidentification, time, and space). However, none have substantially considered the sport-specific issues related to consent, which sits at the heart of best practice. The scarcity of discussing consent is limiting sport psychology’s potential to establish itself as a more recognized profession. This article highlights some contextual issues that challenge the idea and efficacy of informed consent. It proposes adapting consent procedures in the collaboration between sport psychology practitioners and clients to better address the current contextual challenges in applied sport psychology. In doing so, the current paper introduces Empowered Consent, which is specifically designed to empower athletes and address challenges related to choosing interventions, contractual obligations, visibility in the environment, and staff trying to gain insights into confidential information. The author offers a model to enhance applied practice for those collaborating with athletes and other clients in sport.
Consent, Background Justice and Patterned Privacy Principles
Consent, Background Justice and Patterned Privacy Principles
Molly Powell
Political Studies, 27 April 2023
Open Access
Abstract
Notice and consent approaches, being the most prevalent legal frameworks, have in recent years come under fire. I suggest they fail because they rest on a historical approach to privacy justice, whereby the justice of a particular state of affairs is a function of whether each transaction on the way was just. Instead, I make use of a background justice framing. Even where consent is present it is inadequate to secure the values at stake. When we only assess the fairness or freedom of individual information transactions, we fail to see the way many can undercut the very values we seek to secure by requiring consent for disclosures in the first place. I propose a patterned principle to regulate the distribution of individual control over privacy, and to set the background against which individual notice and consent can still play a role, albeit a limited one.
A Structure, Understanding, Recent Developments and New Definition for Consent
A Structure, Understanding, Recent Developments and New Definition for Consent
ResearchGate, April 2023
Scott McLachlan, Kudakwashe Dube, Yvonne Choi, Samir Saidi, Louise Rose, Norman Fenton
Abstract
Consent to medical intervention is a core legal concept that is ubiquitous and yet continues to frustrate governments, organisations, researchers and the wider community. Most requests for consent incorporate only those elements immediately required to meet ethics review board or organisational definitions, absent a holistic view of all elements that make up the concept of true fully informed consent. As a consequence, most methods and applications of consent could be characterised as incomplete, possibly because there are few works that have sought to consolidate our understanding of consent, the consent process, and the methods used in different applications. This paper addresses this gap by reviewing and consolidating the literature, characterising and redefining consent and exploring the ways in which consent is obtained. We present a new consent framework synthesised from philosophical, practical and application models. This framework is presented in the context of contemporary events of global importance. We define consent as “Revocable words or actions freely performed by a person who is capable and aware that create agreement with another party to permit some specific act”. This paper contributes to our ongoing understanding and future development of consent as a normative medico-legal process and provides a definitive framework which enables those involved in the consent process to ensure that all aspects necessary for fully informed consent are addressed.
Informed Consent: A Monthly Review
_________________
May 2023 :: Issue 53
This digest aggregates and distills key content addressing informed consent from a broad spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and grey literature, and from various practice domains and organization types including international agencies, INGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortiums and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We acknowledge that this scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive digest product.
Informed Consent: A Monthly Review is a service of the Center for Informed Consent Integrity, a program of the GE2P2 Global Foundation. The Foundation is solely responsible for its content. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:
Editor
Paige Fitzsimmons, MA
Associate Director, Center for Informed Consent Integrity
GE2P2 Global Foundation
paige.fitzsimmons@ge2p2global.org
PDF Version: Center for Informed Consent Integrity – A Monthly Review_May 2023
Spotlight Articles
We include a spotlight section which highlights articles appearing in each edition which the editorial team has assessed to be strategically important and well aligned to our thematic focus areas of governance, ethics, policy and practice. The full citation/abstract for each spotlight item appears just below this summary.
In Exploring the Ethical and Moral Implications of Requiring Informed Consent to Determine Death by Neurologic Criteria Hibbs et al. discuss the role of consent in the declaration of brain death. While assessing and declaring brain death have been widely discussed, consent has been largely absent from this conversation to date.
In the article Explanation before Adoption: Supporting Informed Consent for Complex Machine Learning and IoT Health Platforms Eardley et al. write about explaining complex health technology platforms to non-technical audiences. A sufficiently comprehensive understanding of these systems is integral to gaining informed consent, and is becoming increasingly important with continuous technological integration in routine healthcare.
Jeyabalan et al. discuss consent for the use of drones in healthcare in their article To Obtain Informed Consent or Not to Obtain Informed Consent? Drones for Health Programs in the Grey Zone between Research and Public Health. In this article, the authors consider consent at both an individual and community level when using drones to map remote communities for health hazards, risks and safety concerns.
And finally, in Practical issues in pragmatic trials: the implementation of the Diuretic Comparison Project Ferguson et al. highlight the work of the US Department of Veterans Affairs Point of Care Clinical Trial Program. This study had a large patient population and worked to customize procedures to align with local clinical practice.
Exploring the Ethical and Moral Implications of Requiring Informed Consent to Determine Death by Neurologic Criteria
Matthew J. Hibbs, Morgan C. Arnold, Mark S. Beveridge
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, May 2023; 65(5)
Abstract
Background
The American Academy of Pediatrics published guidelines in 1987 providing criteria for the declaration of brain death for children. Multiple societies, including neurology and critical care, renewed these guidelines in 2011 to further standardize the brain-death exam. Despite clear guidelines, laws regarding brain death vary among states, including whether consent is required to perform neurologic testing.
Objective
To examine the role of parental consent in brain-death testing from an ethicolegal perspective as well as its potential to create clinician distress.
Design/Method
Case report
Results
Patient is a 3-year-old, previously healthy male who suffered a tragic submersion injury requiring prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation. During the subsequent hospitalization, his clinical exam, head CT scan, and electroencephalogram demonstrated devastating, irreversible neurologic injury concerning for brain death. The family refused formal brain-death testing, instead requesting more time to allow for a miraculous recovery. The patient remains on life support after 5 weeks and is beginning to experience multiorgan dysfunction.
Discussion
Many physicians feel that brain-death testing should not require parental consent. Despite this, states vary in their requirements for parental consent for brain-death testing. When legally permissible, there are competing ethical principles governing a family’s request to delay or refuse brain-death testing.The principle of informed consent reflects the culture change from a paternalistic physician-patient relationship to a collaborative, family-centered approach. However, the argument remains that brain-death testing offers no therapeutic benefit and has the potential to cause harm via apnea testing, thereby requiring informed consent. This case presentation will illustrate the varied legal landscape surrounding pediatric brain-death testing, the ethical principles involved, and the moral injury that can result.
Explanation before Adoption: Supporting Informed Consent for Complex Machine Learning and IoT Health Platforms
Research Article
Rachel Eardley, Emma L. Tonkin, Ewan Soubutts, Amid Ayobi, Gregory J. L. Tourte, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Ian Craddock, Aisling Ann O’Kane
Association for Computing Machinery: Human-Computer Interaction, 16 April 2023
Open Access
Abstract
Explaining health technology platforms to non-technical members of the public is an important part of the process of informed consent. Complex technology platforms that deal with safety-critical areas are particularly challenging, often operating within private domains (e.g. health services within the home) and used by individuals with various understandings of hardware, software, and algorithmic design. Through two studies, the first an interview and the second an observational study, we questioned how experts (e.g. those who designed, built, and installed a technology platform) supported provision of informed consent by participants. We identify a wide range of tools, techniques, and adaptations used by experts to explain the complex SPHERE sensor-based home health platform, provide implications for the design of tools to aid explanations, suggest opportunities for interactive explanations, present the range of information needed, and indicate future research possibilities in communicating technology platforms.
To Obtain Informed Consent or Not to Obtain Informed Consent? Drones for Health Programs in the Grey Zone between Research and Public Health
Vyshnave Jeyabalan, Lorie Donelle, Patrick Meier, Elysée Nouvet
Drones 2023, 2 April 2023; 7(4)
Abstract
Drones are increasingly being introduced to support healthcare delivery around the world. Most Drones for Health projects are currently in the pilot phase, where frontline staff are testing the feasibility of implementing drones into their healthcare system. Many of these projects are happening in remote localities where populations have been historically under-served within national healthcare systems. Currently, there exists limited drone-specific guidance on best practices for engaging individuals in decision-making about drone use in their communities. Towards supporting the development of such guidance, this paper focuses on the issue of obtaining community and individual consent for implementing Drones for Health projects. This paper is based on original qualitative research involving semi-structured interviews (N = 16) with program managers and implementation staff hired to work on health-related projects using drone technologies. In this paper, we introduce a scenario described by one participant to highlight the ethical and practical challenges associated with the implementation and use of drones for health-related purposes. We explore the ethical and practical complexities of obtaining informed consent from individuals who reside in communities where Drones for Health projects are implemented.
Practical issues in pragmatic trials: the implementation of the Diuretic Comparison Project
Research Article
Ryan E Ferguson, Sarah M Leatherman, Patricia Woods, Cynthia Hau, Robert Lew, William C Cushman, Mary T Brophy, Louis Fiore, Areef Ishani
Society for Clinical Trials, 29 March 2023
Abstract
Background/Aims
The US Department of Veterans Affairs Point of Care Clinical Trial Program conducts studies that utilize informatics infrastructure to integrate clinical trial protocols into routine care delivery. The Diuretic Comparison Project compared hydrochlorothiazide to chlorthalidone in reduction of major cardiovascular events in subjects with hypertension. Here we describe the cultural, technical, regulatory, and logistical challenges and solutions that enabled successful implementation of this large pragmatic comparative effectiveness Point of Care clinical trial.
Methods
Patients were recruited from 72 Veterans Affairs Healthcare Systems using centralized processes for subject identification, obtaining informed consent, data collection, safety monitoring, site communication, and endpoint identification with minimal perturbation of the local clinical care ecosystem. Patients continued to be managed exclusively by their clinical care providers without protocol specified study visits, treatment recommendations, or data collection extraneous to routine care. Centralized study processes were operationalized through the application layer of the electronic health record via a data coordinating center staffed by clinical nurses, data scientists, and statisticians without site-based research coordinators. Study data was collected from the Veterans Affairs electronic health record supplemented by Medicare and National Death Index data.
Results
The study exceeded its enrolled goal (13,523 subjects) and followed subjects for the 5-year study duration. The key determinant of program success was collaboration between researchers, regulators, clinicians, and administrative staff at the site level to customize study procedures to align with local clinical practice. This flexibility was enabled by designation of the study as minimal risk and determination that clinical care providers were not engaged in research by the Veterans Affairs Central Institutional Review Board. Cultural, regulatory, technical, and logistical problems were identified and solved through iterative collaboration between clinical and research entities. Paramount among these problems was customization of the Veterans Affairs electronic health record and data systems to accommodate study procedures.
Conclusions
Leveraging clinical care for large-scale clinical trials is feasible but requires a rethinking of traditional clinical trial design (and regulation) to better meet requirements of clinical care ecosystems. Study designs must accommodate site-specific practice variation to reduce the impact on clinical care. A tradeoff thus exists between designing trial processes tailored to expedite local study implementation versus those to produce a more refined response to the research question. The availability of a uniform and flexible electronic health record in the Department of Veterans Affairs played a major role in the success of the trial. Conducting Point of Care research in other healthcare systems without such research-friendly infrastructure presents a more formidable challenge.
Exploring the Ethical and Moral Implications of Requiring Informed Consent to Determine Death by Neurologic Criteria
Exploring the Ethical and Moral Implications of Requiring Informed Consent to Determine Death by Neurologic Criteria
Matthew J. Hibbs, Morgan C. Arnold, Mark S. Beveridge
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, May 2023; 65(5)
Abstract
Background
The American Academy of Pediatrics published guidelines in 1987 providing criteria for the declaration of brain death for children. Multiple societies, including neurology and critical care, renewed these guidelines in 2011 to further standardize the brain-death exam. Despite clear guidelines, laws regarding brain death vary among states, including whether consent is required to perform neurologic testing.
Objective
To examine the role of parental consent in brain-death testing from an ethicolegal perspective as well as its potential to create clinician distress.
Design/Method
Case report
Results
Patient is a 3-year-old, previously healthy male who suffered a tragic submersion injury requiring prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation. During the subsequent hospitalization, his clinical exam, head CT scan, and electroencephalogram demonstrated devastating, irreversible neurologic injury concerning for brain death. The family refused formal brain-death testing, instead requesting more time to allow for a miraculous recovery. The patient remains on life support after 5 weeks and is beginning to experience multiorgan dysfunction.
Discussion
Many physicians feel that brain-death testing should not require parental consent. Despite this, states vary in their requirements for parental consent for brain-death testing. When legally permissible, there are competing ethical principles governing a family’s request to delay or refuse brain-death testing.The principle of informed consent reflects the culture change from a paternalistic physician-patient relationship to a collaborative, family-centered approach. However, the argument remains that brain-death testing offers no therapeutic benefit and has the potential to cause harm via apnea testing, thereby requiring informed consent. This case presentation will illustrate the varied legal landscape surrounding pediatric brain-death testing, the ethical principles involved, and the moral injury that can result.
Explanation before Adoption: Supporting Informed Consent for Complex Machine Learning and IoT Health Platforms
Explanation before Adoption: Supporting Informed Consent for Complex Machine Learning and IoT Health Platforms
Research Article
Rachel Eardley, Emma L. Tonkin, Ewan Soubutts, Amid Ayobi, Gregory J. L. Tourte, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Ian Craddock, Aisling Ann O’Kane
Association for Computing Machinery: Human-Computer Interaction, 16 April 2023
Open Access
Abstract
Explaining health technology platforms to non-technical members of the public is an important part of the process of informed consent. Complex technology platforms that deal with safety-critical areas are particularly challenging, often operating within private domains (e.g. health services within the home) and used by individuals with various understandings of hardware, software, and algorithmic design. Through two studies, the first an interview and the second an observational study, we questioned how experts (e.g. those who designed, built, and installed a technology platform) supported provision of informed consent by participants. We identify a wide range of tools, techniques, and adaptations used by experts to explain the complex SPHERE sensor-based home health platform, provide implications for the design of tools to aid explanations, suggest opportunities for interactive explanations, present the range of information needed, and indicate future research possibilities in communicating technology platforms.