View
233
Download
3
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
Legal and Ethical Issues
Ethics
2
Learning Outcomes Describe the historical background that led to the
development of ethical guidelines for the use of human subjects in research.
Identify the essential elements of an informed consent form.
Evaluate the adequacy of an informed consent form.
Describe the research ethics board’s role in the research review process.
Identify populations of subjects who require special legal and ethical research considerations.
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
3
Learning Outcomes (cont’d)
Appreciate the nurse researcher’s obligations to conduct and report research in an ethical manner.
Describe the nurse’s role as client advocate in research situations.
Discuss the nurse’s role in ensuring that Health Canada guidelines for testing of medical devices are followed.
Discuss animal rights in research situations. Critique the ethical aspects of a research study.
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
4
Ethics and History
History places ethics in perspective Those who fail to study history are
condemned to repeat it Ethics: Disciplined study of morality Morality: What should one’s behaviour and
character be?
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
5
Historical Ethical Dilemmas
Nazi experiments Milgram’s shock study Untreated syphilis in Black males (Tuskagee study) San Antonio contraceptive study Cameron’s LSD and brainwashing studies Jewish chronic disease study Willowbrook Hospital—hepatitis studies Ivory Coast AIDS/AZT studies
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
6
•Milgram’s study: Milgram sought to understand whether people will obey unethical orders. The Nuremberg war trials often had people saying they were just following orders
Brief outline of study Subjects believed they were administering shocks to
other “subjects” (in fact a confederate who faked pain and begged for mercy!)
Subjects told to continue with the shocks. (Each time an error was made a shock of increasing amount was administered)
2/3 of subjects administered shocks labeled as “dangerous”
7
US National Commission
Identify the basic ethical principles that underlie the conduct of research involving human subjects
Develop guidelines to ensure that research is conducted in accordance with those principles
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
8
Basic Human Rights
Right to self-determination Right to privacy and dignity Right to anonymity and confidentiality Right to fair treatment Right to protection from discomfort and
harm
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
9
Basic Ethical Principles
Respect for persons Beneficence Justice
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
10
Respect for Persons
Treat individuals as autonomous agents Do not use a person as a means to an end Allow people to choose for themselves Give extra protection to those with limited
autonomy
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
11
Beneficence
Acts of kindness or charity that go beyond duty
Obligations derived from beneficence– Do no harm– Prevent harm– Prevent evil– Promote good
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
12
Justice
Treat people fairly Fair sharing of burdens and benefits of
research Distinguish procedural justice from
distributive (society as a whole) justice
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
13
Principles Applied
Respect: Informed consent, respect for privacy
Beneficence: Sound research design, competent investigators, favourable risk-benefit ratio
Justice: Equitable selection of subjects
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
14
Definition of Human Subject
A living individual about whom an investigator . . . conducting research obtains:– Data through intervention or interaction
with the individual, or – Identifiable private information
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
15
Informed Consent Process
Does NOT Equal
Informed Consent Form!
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
16
Informed Consent
What it is– Ongoing process of communications and
mutual understanding– Shared responsibility for protection
What it is not– Piece of paper– Moment in time– Legal contract
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
17
Elements of Informed Consent Form Study involves research
– Purpose of research– Expected duration for subject– Description of procedures– Identification of experimental procedures
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
18
Elements of Informed Consent Form (cont’d) Reasonably foreseeable risks or
discomforts– How can risks be minimized?
Reasonably foreseeable benefits for subjects or others– How can benefits be maximized?
Alternative procedures or treatments
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
19
Elements of Informed Consent Form (cont’d) Confidentiality Compensation for research-related injury Who can answer questions
– About study and research-related injuries– About subject’s rights
Voluntary participation
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
20
Present in consent that generally involves an intervention– May involve unforeseeable risks– Situations where researcher can terminate
subject’s participation– Any additional costs– Consequences and procedures for subject’s
early withdrawal– Revelation of new findings
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
Elements of Informed Consent Form (cont’d)
21
Elements of Informed Consent Form (cont’d)
Payment: total or prorated Who has access to records? Probability of random assignment Special qualifications of investigator
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
22
Comprehension
Not valid unless subject understands Responsibility for understanding rests with
researcher, who must consider:– Nature of population– Type of information– Circumstance and timing– Language and culture
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
23
Research Ethics Boards (REBs) Review research projects and assess that ethical
standards are met in relation to the protection of the rights of human subjects
1. At least five members of various backgrounds to promote complete and adequate project review
2. Members qualified by virtue of expertise, experience, and reflect professional, gender, racial, and cultural diversity
3. Membership must include one member whose concerns are primarily non-scientific (lawyer, member of clergy, ethicist)
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
24
Research Ethics Boards (cont’d)
4. At least one member from outside the institution (community member)
5. REB members have mandatory training in scientific integrity and prevention of scientific misconduct, as do principal investigators of a research study and research team members
6. REB is responsible for protecting subjects from undue risk and loss of personal rights and dignity
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
25
REB Role Assessing recruitment: Is it fair? Evaluating inclusion and exclusion criteria Investigator-subject relationship Role of REB in study? Consent: Maximize autonomy Additional protections Assessing risk and benefit Assessing consent forms and process
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
26
Recruitment
Plans and materials must be reviewed by REB
Public service announcement or ads also reviewed
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
27
Approval Categories Exempt: Low risk, non-vulnerable, non-
sensitive, short duration (6 categories; e.g., educational)
Expedited review: Minimal risk (no substantive increase beyond risks of ordinary life), non-vulnerable, non-sensitive topic (9 categories; e.g., chart review, questionnaires)
Full board reviewCopyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
28
Full Board Review
All members participate and review All members participate in discussion and
make comments Decision is rendered by a majority of
assembled quorum No member has a conflict of interest
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
29
Approval Criteria
Risks minimized Risks balanced by
benefits Subject selection
equitable Procedures for
obtaining informed consent
Procedures for consent documentation
Data monitoring provisions
Privacy and confidentiality measures
Safeguards for vulnerable subjects
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
30
Risk Assessment
Probability of harm occurring as a result of participation
Quantified by probability and magnitude Types: Social, legal, physical, economic,
psychological May apply to individual or society
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
31
Benefit Assessment
Valued or desired outcome, an advantage Quantified by probability or magnitude Types: Medical, psychological, kinship May apply to individual or society
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
32
Special Considerations Vulnerable subjects
– Children– Prisoners– Mentally disabled persons– Economically disadvantaged– Educationally disadvantaged– Subtle vulnerability: language, culture,
pregnancy, students, employees, substance abuse, health status
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
33
CNA’s Code of Ethics, 2008
Promoting safe, compassionate, competent, and ethical care
Promoting health and well-being Promoting and respecting informed decision-making Preserving dignity Maintaining privacy and confidentiality Promoting justice Being accountable
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
34
Critical Thinking Decision Path: Evaluating
the Risk–Benefit Ratio of a Research Study
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
35
Research Involving Aboriginal People Guidelines (2003) set by Tri-Council (CIHR,
NSERC, SSHRC) as “good practices” for researchers and REBs to follow when research involves Aboriginal people
Emphasis on Aboriginal involvement in design, respect for cultural ways, making the research worthwhile to the people, working with people as partners
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
36
Scientific Fraud and Misconduct
Fraudulent studies increase risk to all Misconduct and unauthorized studies
increase risk as well Can harm subjects Basing clinical practice on false data Nurses obligated to report if they witness
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
37
Product Testing
Nurses often asked to participate in product testing of medical products
Be aware of Health Canada guidelines for health products research
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
38
Research with Animals
Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) assesses all agencies who work with animal research every three years (with random spot inspections in between)
Nurses should be aware of the guidelines of animal rights and report any observed infractions
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
39
Human Gamete, Embryo, Fetus
Tri-Council guidelines—2003 (available online)
Restricts cloning, any attempts to create, or to use, gametes/embryos/fetuses in unethical research
Allows in utero research procedures to treat embryo with genetic or congenital disorders
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Canada, a division of Reed Elsevier Canada, Ltd.
40
Film: The Pill (overview)
Drive to find a solution to unwanted pregnancy – to increase women’s reproductive choices and to control the population
At What cost? Ethical considerations Experiment on women (women as guinea pigs) Deception (say pill was safe and effective) & women did not know they were part
of experiment (Lack of informed consent) Fought to cover up side-effects (one side effect was death) Sexist, racist and classist climate– viewed women as inferior – suggestions they
would not experiment on men, not just due to different biological make up but also due to how men perceived their reproductive responsibility- experimented outside the US on poor Hispanic women. (Inequality in society - women had little control over their own reproductivity including the power to say NO – many desperate for pregnancy prevention)
Later Pills banned in US – used in developing countries – over the counter – not prescription – no doctor monitoring
(also consult your notes on film for more details)
41
The Tri-Council Ethics Statement
Following is a condensed version of the Tri-Council ethics statement. 1. Respect for Human Dignity: The cardinal principle of modern research ethics is respect for human dignity. This
principle aspires to protecting the multiple and interdependent interests of the person -- from bodily to psychological to cultural integrity. This principle forms the basis of the ethical obligations in research that are listed below. It is unacceptable to treat persons solely as means (mere objects or things), because doing so fails to respect their intrinsic human dignity and thus impoverishes all of humanity. Second, the welfare and integrity of the individual remain paramount in human research.
2. Respect for Free and Informed Consent: Individuals are generally presumed to have the capacity and right to make free and informed decisions. Respect for persons thus means respecting the exercise of individual consent. The principle of respect for persons translates into the process and requirements for free and informed consent by the research subject.
3. Respect for Vulnerable Persons: Respect for human dignity entails high ethical obligations towards vulnerable persons -- to those whose diminished competence and/or decision-making capacity make them vulnerable. Children, institutionalized persons or others who are vulnerable are entitled, on grounds of human dignity, caring and fairness, to special protection against abuse, exploitation or discrimination. Ethical obligations to vulnerable individuals in the research enterprise will often translate into special procedures to protect their interests.
4. Respect for Privacy and Confidentiality: Respect for human dignity also implies the principles of respect for privacy and confidentiality. Privacy and confidentiality are considered fundamental to human dignity. Thus, standards of privacy and confidentiality protect the access, control and dissemination of personal information. In doing so, such standards help to protect mental or psychological integrity.
5. Respect for Justice and Inclusiveness: Justice connotes fairness and equity, and concerns the distribution of benefits and burdens of research. On the one hand, distributive justice means that no segment of the population should be unfairly burdened with the harms of research. It thus imposes particular obligations toward individuals who are vulnerable and unable to protect their own interests in order to ensure that they are not exploited for the advancement of knowledge. On the other hand, distributive justice also imposes duties neither to neglect nor discriminate against individuals and groups who may benefit from advances in research.
6. Balancing Harms and Benefits: The analysis, balance and distribution of harms and benefits are critical to the ethics of human research. Modern research ethics, for instance, require a favourable harms-benefit balance -- that is, that the foreseeable harms should not outweigh anticipated benefits.
7. Minimizing Harm: Research subjects must not be subjected to unnecessary risks of harm, and their participation in research must be essential to achieving scientifically and societally important aims that cannot be realized without the participation of human subjects. In addition, it should be kept in mind that the principle of minimizing harm requires that the research involve the smallest number of human subjects and the smallest number of tests on these subjects that will ensure scientifically valid data.
http://www.von.ca/Research%20Ethics/Tri-council%20Policy%20Statement.pdf
Recommended