Cargando…

Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent

BACKGROUND: Clinical cancer research trials may offer little or no direct clinical benefit to participants where a cure is no longer possible. As such, the decision-making and consent process for patient participation is often challenging. AIM: To gain understanding of how patients make decisions re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murphy, Mary, McCaughan, Eilís, Carson, Matthew A, Donovan, Monica, Wilson, Richard H, Fitzsimons, Donna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7602307/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33126874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00661-7
_version_ 1783603648024018944
author Murphy, Mary
McCaughan, Eilís
Carson, Matthew A
Donovan, Monica
Wilson, Richard H
Fitzsimons, Donna
author_facet Murphy, Mary
McCaughan, Eilís
Carson, Matthew A
Donovan, Monica
Wilson, Richard H
Fitzsimons, Donna
author_sort Murphy, Mary
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical cancer research trials may offer little or no direct clinical benefit to participants where a cure is no longer possible. As such, the decision-making and consent process for patient participation is often challenging. AIM: To gain understanding of how patients make decisions regarding clinical trial participation, from the perspective of both the patient and healthcare professionals involved. METHODS: In-depth, face to face interviews using a grounded theory approach. This study was conducted in a regional Cancer Centre in the United Kingdom. Of the 36 interviews, 16 were conducted with patients with cancer that had non-curative intent and 18 with healthcare professionals involved in the consent process. RESULTS: ‘Nothing to lose’ was identified as the core category that underpinned all other data within the study. This highlighted the desperation articulated by participants, who asserted trial participation was the ‘only hope in the room’. The decision regarding participation was taken within a ‘trusting relationship’ that was important to both patients and professionals. Both were united in their ‘fight against cancer’. These two categories are critical in understanding the decision-making/consent process and are supported by other themes presented in the theoretical model. CONCLUSION: This study presents an important insight into the complex and ethically contentious situation of consent in clinical trials that have non-curative intent. It confirms that patients with limited options trust their doctor and frequently hold unrealistic hopes for personal benefit. It highlights a need for further research to develop a more robust and context appropriate consent process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7602307
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76023072020-11-02 Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent Murphy, Mary McCaughan, Eilís Carson, Matthew A Donovan, Monica Wilson, Richard H Fitzsimons, Donna BMC Palliat Care Research Article BACKGROUND: Clinical cancer research trials may offer little or no direct clinical benefit to participants where a cure is no longer possible. As such, the decision-making and consent process for patient participation is often challenging. AIM: To gain understanding of how patients make decisions regarding clinical trial participation, from the perspective of both the patient and healthcare professionals involved. METHODS: In-depth, face to face interviews using a grounded theory approach. This study was conducted in a regional Cancer Centre in the United Kingdom. Of the 36 interviews, 16 were conducted with patients with cancer that had non-curative intent and 18 with healthcare professionals involved in the consent process. RESULTS: ‘Nothing to lose’ was identified as the core category that underpinned all other data within the study. This highlighted the desperation articulated by participants, who asserted trial participation was the ‘only hope in the room’. The decision regarding participation was taken within a ‘trusting relationship’ that was important to both patients and professionals. Both were united in their ‘fight against cancer’. These two categories are critical in understanding the decision-making/consent process and are supported by other themes presented in the theoretical model. CONCLUSION: This study presents an important insight into the complex and ethically contentious situation of consent in clinical trials that have non-curative intent. It confirms that patients with limited options trust their doctor and frequently hold unrealistic hopes for personal benefit. It highlights a need for further research to develop a more robust and context appropriate consent process. BioMed Central 2020-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7602307/ /pubmed/33126874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00661-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Murphy, Mary
McCaughan, Eilís
Carson, Matthew A
Donovan, Monica
Wilson, Richard H
Fitzsimons, Donna
Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title_full Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title_fullStr Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title_full_unstemmed Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title_short Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
title_sort nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7602307/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33126874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00661-7
work_keys_str_mv AT murphymary nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent
AT mccaughaneilis nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent
AT carsonmatthewa nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent
AT donovanmonica nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent
AT wilsonrichardh nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent
AT fitzsimonsdonna nothingtoloseagroundedtheorystudyofpatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsperspectivesofbeinginvolvedintheconsentprocessforoncologytrialswithnoncurativeintent