Cargando…

Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants

OBJECTIVE: The adequacy of informed consent in the Surfactant, Positive Pressure, and Pulse Oximetry Randomized Trial (SUPPORT) has been questioned. SUPPORT investigators and publishing editors, heads of government study funding agencies, and many ethicists have argued that informed consent was adeq...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cortés-Puch, Irene, Wesley, Robert A., Carome, Michael A., Danner, Robert L., Wolfe, Sidney M., Natanson, Charles
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4871545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27191961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155005
_version_ 1782432615450542080
author Cortés-Puch, Irene
Wesley, Robert A.
Carome, Michael A.
Danner, Robert L.
Wolfe, Sidney M.
Natanson, Charles
author_facet Cortés-Puch, Irene
Wesley, Robert A.
Carome, Michael A.
Danner, Robert L.
Wolfe, Sidney M.
Natanson, Charles
author_sort Cortés-Puch, Irene
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The adequacy of informed consent in the Surfactant, Positive Pressure, and Pulse Oximetry Randomized Trial (SUPPORT) has been questioned. SUPPORT investigators and publishing editors, heads of government study funding agencies, and many ethicists have argued that informed consent was adequate because the two oxygen saturation target ranges studied fell within a range commonly recommended in guidelines. We sought to determine whether each oxygen target as studied in SUPPORT and four similar randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was consistent with usual care. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for English articles back to 1990 providing information on usual care oxygen management in extremely premature infants. Data were extracted on intended and achieved oxygen saturation levels as determined by pulse oximetry. Twenty-two SUPPORT consent forms were examined for statements about oxygen interventions. RESULTS: While the high oxygen saturation target range (91 to 95%) was consistent with usual care, the low range (85 to 89%) was not used outside of the SUPPORT trial according to surveys and clinical studies of usual care. During usual care, similar lower limits (< 88%) were universally paired with higher upper limits (≥ 92%) and providers skewed achieved oxygen saturations toward the upper-end of these intended ranges. Blinded targeting of a low narrow range resulted in significantly lower achieved oxygen saturations and a doubling of time spent below the lower limit of the intended range compared to usual care practices. The SUPPORT consent forms suggested that the low oxygen saturation arm was a widely practiced subset of usual care. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT does not exemplify comparative effectiveness research studying practices or therapies in common use. Descriptions of major differences between the interventions studied and commonly practiced usual care, as well as potential risks associated with these differences, are essential elements of adequate informed consent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4871545
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48715452016-05-31 Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants Cortés-Puch, Irene Wesley, Robert A. Carome, Michael A. Danner, Robert L. Wolfe, Sidney M. Natanson, Charles PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: The adequacy of informed consent in the Surfactant, Positive Pressure, and Pulse Oximetry Randomized Trial (SUPPORT) has been questioned. SUPPORT investigators and publishing editors, heads of government study funding agencies, and many ethicists have argued that informed consent was adequate because the two oxygen saturation target ranges studied fell within a range commonly recommended in guidelines. We sought to determine whether each oxygen target as studied in SUPPORT and four similar randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was consistent with usual care. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for English articles back to 1990 providing information on usual care oxygen management in extremely premature infants. Data were extracted on intended and achieved oxygen saturation levels as determined by pulse oximetry. Twenty-two SUPPORT consent forms were examined for statements about oxygen interventions. RESULTS: While the high oxygen saturation target range (91 to 95%) was consistent with usual care, the low range (85 to 89%) was not used outside of the SUPPORT trial according to surveys and clinical studies of usual care. During usual care, similar lower limits (< 88%) were universally paired with higher upper limits (≥ 92%) and providers skewed achieved oxygen saturations toward the upper-end of these intended ranges. Blinded targeting of a low narrow range resulted in significantly lower achieved oxygen saturations and a doubling of time spent below the lower limit of the intended range compared to usual care practices. The SUPPORT consent forms suggested that the low oxygen saturation arm was a widely practiced subset of usual care. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT does not exemplify comparative effectiveness research studying practices or therapies in common use. Descriptions of major differences between the interventions studied and commonly practiced usual care, as well as potential risks associated with these differences, are essential elements of adequate informed consent. Public Library of Science 2016-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4871545/ /pubmed/27191961 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155005 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) public domain dedication.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cortés-Puch, Irene
Wesley, Robert A.
Carome, Michael A.
Danner, Robert L.
Wolfe, Sidney M.
Natanson, Charles
Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title_full Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title_fullStr Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title_full_unstemmed Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title_short Usual Care and Informed Consent in Clinical Trials of Oxygen Management in Extremely Premature Infants
title_sort usual care and informed consent in clinical trials of oxygen management in extremely premature infants
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4871545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27191961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155005
work_keys_str_mv AT cortespuchirene usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants
AT wesleyroberta usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants
AT caromemichaela usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants
AT dannerrobertl usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants
AT wolfesidneym usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants
AT natansoncharles usualcareandinformedconsentinclinicaltrialsofoxygenmanagementinextremelyprematureinfants