When is waiver of consent appropriate in a neonatal clinical trial?

Pediatrics

Volumn 134, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 1006-1012

  Schreiner, Mark S ^a,b   Feltman, Dalia ^c,d   Wiswell, Thomas ^e   Wootton, Susan ^f   Arnold, Cody ^f   Tyson, Jon ^f   Lantos, John D ^g,h  

^a CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c EVANSTON HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^e FLORIDA HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY   (United States)

^h CHILDREN S MERCY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Child; Consent; Equipoise; Ethics; Meconium aspiration; Research

Indexed keywords

AMNION FLUID; ARTIFICIAL VENTILATION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INFORMED CONSENT; MECONIUM ASPIRATION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; NOTE; PARENTAL CONSENT; PRENATAL PERIOD; RESUSCITATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SAFETY; TRACHEOBRONCHIAL TOILET; TRUST; WAIVER OF CONSENT; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; ETHICS; NEWBORN; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFORMED CONSENT; PARENTAL CONSENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84908877180     PISSN: 00314005     EISSN: 10984275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-0207     Document Type: Note

References (37)

1. Kääpä PO. Meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS): where do we go? Research perspectives. Early Hum Dev. 2009;85(10):627-629
2. Ghidini A, Spong CY. Severe meconium aspiration syndrome is not caused by aspiration of meconium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185(4):931-938
3. Vain NE, Szyld EG, Prudent LM, Aguilar AM. What (not) to do at and after delivery? Prevention and management of meconium aspiration syndrome. Early Hum Dev. 2009;85(10):621-626
4. Vain NE, Szyld EG, Prudent LM, Wiswell TE, Aguilar AM, Vivas NI. Oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal suctioning of meconium-stained neonates before delivery of their shoulders: multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;364(9434):597-602
5. Wiswell TE, Gannon CM, Jacob J, et al. Delivery room management of the apparently vigorous meconium-stained neonate: results of the multicenter, international collaborative trial. Pediatrics. 2000;105(1 pt 1):1-7
6. Wiswell TE. Handling the meconium-stained infant. Semin Neonatol. 2001;6(3):225-231
7. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical. Lancet. 2005;365(9467):1348-1353
8. Lilford RJ, Thornton JG, Braunholtz D. Clinical trials and rare diseases: a way out of a conundrum. BMJ. 1995;311(7020):1621-1625
9. Kelleher J, Bhat R, Salas AA, et al. Oronasopharyngeal suction versus wiping of the mouth and nose at birth: a randomised equivalency trial. Lancet. 2013;382(9889):326-330
10. Colloca L, Miller FG. The nocebo effect and its relevance for clinical practice. Psychosom Med. 2011;73(7):598-603
11. Loftus EF, Fries JF. Informed consent may be hazardous to your health. Science. 1979;204(4388):11
12. Sosa R, Kennell J, Klaus M, Robertson S, Urrutia J. The effect of a supportive companion on perinatal problems, length of labor, and mother-infant interaction. N Engl J Med. 1980;303(11):597-600
13. Kennell J, Klaus M, McGrath S, Robertson S, Hinkley C. Continuous emotional support during labor in a US hospital. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1991;265(17):2197-2201
14. Haverkamp AD, Orleans M, Langendoerfer S, McFee J, Murphy J, Thompson HE. A controlled trial of the differential effects of intrapartum fetal monitoring. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;134(4):399-412
15. Myers RE. Maternal psychological stress and fetal asphyxia: a study in the monkey. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;122(1):47-59
16. IRB Guidebook. Available at: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/irb/irb-guidebook.htm. Accessed January 7, 2014
17. OHRP public meeting. August 28, 2013. Available at: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/newsroom/rfc. Accessed January 7, 2014
18. US Department of Health & Human Services. Informed consent requirements in emergency research. 1996. Available at: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/hsdc97-01.html
19. Wootton SH, Evans PW, Tyson JE. Unproven therapies in clinical research and practice: the necessity to change the regulatory paradigm. Pediatrics. 2013;132(4):599-601
20. Faden RR, Kass NE, Goodman SN, et al. An ethics framework for a learning health care system: a departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics. Hastings Cent Rep. 2013;(Spec No):S16-S27
21. Kass NE, Faden RR, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Tunis S, Beauchamp TL. The research-treatment distinction: a problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. Hastings Cent Rep. 2013;(Spec No):S4-S15
22. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Best Care at Lower Cost. The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2013
23. Joffe S, Truog R. Equipoise and randomization. In: Emanuel EJ, Grady C, Crouch RA, Lie R, Miller F, Wendler D, eds. The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2008:245-260
24. Halliday HL. Endotracheal intubation at birth for preventing morbidity and mortality in vigorous, meconium-stained infants born at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;1(1). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000500
25. Rich WD, Auten KJ, Gantz MG, et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Antenatal consent in the SUPPORT trial: challenges, costs, and representative enrollment. Pediatrics. 2010;126(1). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/126/1/e215
26. Vermont Oxford Network. Proposal to IRB/HREB. Available at: www.vtoxford.org/research/help/help.aspx. Accessed January 6, 2013
27. Allmark P, Mason S. Improving the quality of consent to randomised controlled trials by using continuous consent and clinician training in the consent process. J Med Ethics. 2006;32(8):439-443
28. Ballard HO, Shook LA, Desai NS, Anand KJS. Neonatal research and the validity of informed consent obtained in the perinatal period. J Perinatol. 2004;24(7):409-415
29. Mason SA, Allmark PJ; Euricon Study Group. Obtaining informed consent to neonatal randomised controlled trials: interviews with parents and clinicians in the Euricon study. Lancet. 2000;356(9247):2045-2051
30. Singhal N, Oberle K, Burgess E, Huber-Okrainec J. Parents' perceptions of research with newborns. J Perinatol. 2002;22(1):57-63
31. Allmark P, Spedding M. Clinical trials in neonates: ethical issues. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2007;12(4):318-323
32. Magnus D, Caplan AL. Risk, consent, and SUPPORT. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(20):1864-1865
33. Drazen JM, Solomon CG, Greene MF. Informed consent and SUPPORT. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(20):1929-1931
34. Wilfond BS, Magnus D, Antommaria AH, et al. The OHRP and SUPPORT. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(25):e36
35. Department of Health and Human Services. Code of Federal Regulations Title 45: Public welfare. Part 46: protection of human subjects. 2009, July 14. Available at: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/ohrpregulations.pdf. Accessed September 18, 2013
36. Shah S, Whittle A, Wilfond B, Gensler G, Wendler D. How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research? JAMA. 2004;291(4):476-482
37. Anand KJS, Suresh S. Tracheal intubation in neonates, infants, and children: is there a right way? Crit Care Med. 2004;32(2):614-616