Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Sep;40(9):2590-4.
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318258ff19.

Surrogate and patient discrepancy regarding consent for critical care research

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Surrogate and patient discrepancy regarding consent for critical care research

Julia T Newman et al. Crit Care Med. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: Critically ill patients frequently display impaired decision-making capacity due to their underlying illness and the use of sedating medications. Healthcare providers often rely on surrogates to make decisions for medical care and participation in clinical research. However, the accuracy of surrogate decisions for a variety of critical care research studies is poorly understood.

Design: Cross-sectional observational study.

Setting: Academic medical center.

Patients: Medical intensive care unit patients and their designated surrogates.

Intervention: Patients were asked whether they would consent to participate in hypothetical research studies of increasing complexity, and surrogates independently indicated whether they would consent to enroll the patient in the same scenarios.

Results: Overall, 69 medical intensive care unit patients were enrolled into the study. The majority of surrogates were either the spouse (58%) or parent (22%) of the patient. The percentage of patients that would agree to participate in a research study and the percentage of surrogates that would agree to have the patient enrolled into a research study both declined as the risk of the study increased (p < .001 for both analyses). In addition, the overall discrepancy, the false-negative rates, and the false-positive rates between patient and surrogates were greater as the risk of the study increased (p < .001, p < .001, and p = .049, respectively). κ values for all seven scenarios demonstrated less-than-moderate agreement (range 0.03-0.41).

Conclusions: There are significant discrepancies in the willingness to participate in various types of clinical research proposals between critically ill patients and their surrogate decision makers. The results of this study raise concerns about the use of surrogate consent for inclusion of critically ill patients into research protocols.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have not disclosed any potential conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Luce JM, Cook DJ, Martin TR, et al. The ethical conduct of clinical research involving critically ill patients in the United States and Canada: principles and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;170:1375–1384. - PubMed
    1. Smithline HA, Mader TJ, Crenshaw BJ. Do patients with acute medical conditions have the capacity to give informed consent for emergency medicine research? Acad Emerg Med. 1999;6:776–780. - PubMed
    1. Etchells E, Sharpe G, Walsh P, Williams JR, Singer PA. Bioethics for clinicians: 1. Consent CMAJ. 1996;155:177–180. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lemaire F. Informed consent for and regulation of critical care research. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008;14:696–699. - PubMed
    1. Silverman HJ, Luce JM, Lanken PN, et al. Recommendations for informed consent forms for critical care clinical trials. Crit Care Med. 2005;33:867–882. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms