Who Will Consent to Emergency Treatment Trials for Subarachnoid Hemorrhage?

Objectives:  Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a devastating disorder that still requires much clinical study. However, the decision to participate in a randomized clinical trial, particularly a neuroemergency trial, is a complex one. The purposes of this survey were to determine who would...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAcademic emergency medicine Vol. 16; no. 4; pp. 309 - 315
Main Authors Del Giudice, Angela, Plaum, Justin, Maloney, Eileen, Kasner, Scott E., Le Roux, Peter D., Baren, Jill M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.04.2009
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1069-6563
1553-2712
1553-2712
DOI10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00367.x

Cover

More Information
Summary:Objectives:  Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a devastating disorder that still requires much clinical study. However, the decision to participate in a randomized clinical trial, particularly a neuroemergency trial, is a complex one. The purposes of this survey were to determine who would participate in a randomized clinical trial that intended to examine transfusion practices after SAH, to identify who could serve as potential proxy decision‐makers, and to find which patient characteristics were associated with the decision to participate. Methods:  This was a cross‐sectional study using a self‐administered questionnaire, composed of a brief description of the proposed trial followed by questions about participation using a 5‐point Likert scale. Information sought included potential decision‐maker, demographic data, setting and reason for current health care access, and personal or family history of neurologic injury. Results:  Nine‐hundred five subjects were enrolled during emergency department (ED) visits, office visits, hospital admissions, or online, during a 1‐month period: 63% were women and 46% were white. Nonneurologic problems were the leading reason (90%) for health care access, but 45% had a personal or family history of neurologic injury. Overall, 54% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 51% to 57%) of subjects stated they would definitely or probably consent to participate. No subject characteristics were associated with this decision: age (p = 0.28), sex (p = 0.16), race/ethnicity (p = 0.07), education (p = 0.44), religion (p = 0.42), clinical setting (p = 0.14), reason for visit (p = 0.58), and/or history of neurologic injury (p = 0.33). The vast majority (88%) identified a family member as the proxy decision‐maker, again without differences among groups. Conclusions:  Greater than half of respondents stated they would participate in a proposed emergency treatment trial for SAH. Our survey suggests that the decision to participate is highly individualized, because no demographic, pathologic, historical, or access‐related predictors of choice were found. Educational materials designed for this type of trial would need to be broad‐based. Family members should be considered as proxy decision‐makers where permitted by federal and local regulations.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1069-6563
1553-2712
1553-2712
DOI:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00367.x