Cargando…

Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chappuy, Hélène, Bouazza, Naim, Minard-Colin, Veronique, Patte, Catherine, Brugières, Laurence, Landman-Parker, Judith, Auvrignon, Anne, Davous, Dominique, Pacquement, Hélène, Orbach, Daniel, Tréluyer, Jean Marc, Doz, François
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3657641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23793670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733
_version_ 1782270154805084160
author Chappuy, Hélène
Bouazza, Naim
Minard-Colin, Veronique
Patte, Catherine
Brugières, Laurence
Landman-Parker, Judith
Auvrignon, Anne
Davous, Dominique
Pacquement, Hélène
Orbach, Daniel
Tréluyer, Jean Marc
Doz, François
author_facet Chappuy, Hélène
Bouazza, Naim
Minard-Colin, Veronique
Patte, Catherine
Brugières, Laurence
Landman-Parker, Judith
Auvrignon, Anne
Davous, Dominique
Pacquement, Hélène
Orbach, Daniel
Tréluyer, Jean Marc
Doz, François
author_sort Chappuy, Hélène
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology centres in the Parisian region in France. PARTICIPANTS: 53 parents were approached to participate in a RCT for their child with malignant solid tumour, over a 1-year period. 40 parents have been interviewed in our study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Parental understanding of information in RCTs, parents’ needs for decision-making. Parents were questioned by a psychologist, independent of the paediatric oncology teams, using a semidirected interview, 1 (M1) and 6 months (M6) after the consent was sought. RESULTS: 18 parents (45%) did not understand the concept of randomisation. Half of the parents could explain neither the aim of the clinical trial nor the potential benefit to their child of inclusion. 35 parents (87.5%) expressed very few specific risks related to the trial. Being mostly French-speaking (p=0.03) and the reading of the information sheet by the parents (p=0.0025) improved their understanding. The parental comprehension did not differ between M1 and M6. The principal factors underlying their decision were confidence in the medical team (39%), wish to access to the best treatment (37%) and the best quality of life (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite medical explanations, parents have limited knowledge in some areas in first-line RCTs and improvements of information process are required. The risks specific to the randomised trial are underestimated by parents and the unproven nature of the treatment is not well-known or understood.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3657641
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36576412013-05-21 Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study Chappuy, Hélène Bouazza, Naim Minard-Colin, Veronique Patte, Catherine Brugières, Laurence Landman-Parker, Judith Auvrignon, Anne Davous, Dominique Pacquement, Hélène Orbach, Daniel Tréluyer, Jean Marc Doz, François BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology centres in the Parisian region in France. PARTICIPANTS: 53 parents were approached to participate in a RCT for their child with malignant solid tumour, over a 1-year period. 40 parents have been interviewed in our study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Parental understanding of information in RCTs, parents’ needs for decision-making. Parents were questioned by a psychologist, independent of the paediatric oncology teams, using a semidirected interview, 1 (M1) and 6 months (M6) after the consent was sought. RESULTS: 18 parents (45%) did not understand the concept of randomisation. Half of the parents could explain neither the aim of the clinical trial nor the potential benefit to their child of inclusion. 35 parents (87.5%) expressed very few specific risks related to the trial. Being mostly French-speaking (p=0.03) and the reading of the information sheet by the parents (p=0.0025) improved their understanding. The parental comprehension did not differ between M1 and M6. The principal factors underlying their decision were confidence in the medical team (39%), wish to access to the best treatment (37%) and the best quality of life (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite medical explanations, parents have limited knowledge in some areas in first-line RCTs and improvements of information process are required. The risks specific to the randomised trial are underestimated by parents and the unproven nature of the treatment is not well-known or understood. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3657641/ /pubmed/23793670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode
spellingShingle Ethics
Chappuy, Hélène
Bouazza, Naim
Minard-Colin, Veronique
Patte, Catherine
Brugières, Laurence
Landman-Parker, Judith
Auvrignon, Anne
Davous, Dominique
Pacquement, Hélène
Orbach, Daniel
Tréluyer, Jean Marc
Doz, François
Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title_full Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title_fullStr Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title_full_unstemmed Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title_short Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
title_sort parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
topic Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3657641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23793670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733
work_keys_str_mv AT chappuyhelene parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT bouazzanaim parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT minardcolinveronique parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT pattecatherine parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT brugiereslaurence parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT landmanparkerjudith parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT auvrignonanne parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT davousdominique parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT pacquementhelene parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT orbachdaniel parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT treluyerjeanmarc parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy
AT dozfrancois parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy