Cargando…

Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Olsson, Anneli, Ring, Camilla, Josefsson, Johan, Eriksson, Annika, Rylance, Rebecca, Fröbert, Ole, James, Stefan, Sparv, David, Erlinge, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7059267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32143733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4147-0
_version_ 1783504013658947584
author Olsson, Anneli
Ring, Camilla
Josefsson, Johan
Eriksson, Annika
Rylance, Rebecca
Fröbert, Ole
James, Stefan
Sparv, David
Erlinge, David
author_facet Olsson, Anneli
Ring, Camilla
Josefsson, Johan
Eriksson, Annika
Rylance, Rebecca
Fröbert, Ole
James, Stefan
Sparv, David
Erlinge, David
author_sort Olsson, Anneli
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied. METHODS: A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time? RESULTS: Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance. CONCLUSION: It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART European Union Clinical Trials Register: 2012-005260-10. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02311231. Registered on 8 Dec 2014.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7059267
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70592672020-03-12 Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial Olsson, Anneli Ring, Camilla Josefsson, Johan Eriksson, Annika Rylance, Rebecca Fröbert, Ole James, Stefan Sparv, David Erlinge, David Trials Research OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied. METHODS: A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time? RESULTS: Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance. CONCLUSION: It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART European Union Clinical Trials Register: 2012-005260-10. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02311231. Registered on 8 Dec 2014. BioMed Central 2020-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7059267/ /pubmed/32143733 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4147-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Olsson, Anneli
Ring, Camilla
Josefsson, Johan
Eriksson, Annika
Rylance, Rebecca
Fröbert, Ole
James, Stefan
Sparv, David
Erlinge, David
Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title_full Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title_fullStr Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title_full_unstemmed Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title_short Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
title_sort patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the validate-swedeheart trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7059267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32143733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4147-0
work_keys_str_mv AT olssonanneli patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT ringcamilla patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT josefssonjohan patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT erikssonannika patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT rylancerebecca patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT frobertole patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT jamesstefan patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT sparvdavid patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial
AT erlingedavid patientexperienceoftheinformedconsentprocessduringacutemyocardialinfarctionasubstudyofthevalidateswedehearttrial