51
|
Abernethy AP, Capell WH, Aziz NM, Ritchie C, Prince-Paul M, Bennett RE, Kutner JS. Ethical conduct of palliative care research: enhancing communication between investigators and institutional review boards. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014; 48:1211-21. [PMID: 24879998 PMCID: PMC4247357 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2014] [Revised: 04/21/2014] [Accepted: 05/06/2014] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Palliative care has faced moral and ethical challenges when conducting research involving human subjects. There are currently no resources to guide institutional review boards (IRBs) in applying standard ethical principles and terms-in a specific way-to palliative care research. Using as a case study a recently completed multisite palliative care clinical trial, this article provides guidance and recommendations for both IRBs and palliative care investigators to facilitate communication and attain the goal of conducting ethical palliative care research and protecting study participants while advancing the science. Beyond identifying current challenges faced by palliative care researchers and IRBs reviewing palliative care research, this article suggests steps that the palliative care research community can take to establish a scientifically sound, stable, productive, and well-functioning relationship between palliative care investigators and the ethical bodies that oversee their work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy P Abernethy
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA; Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Warren H Capell
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Noreen M Aziz
- Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Christine Ritchie
- University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Maryjo Prince-Paul
- Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Jean S Kutner
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
52
|
|
53
|
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine E Sleeman
- King's College London, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK
| | - Fliss Em Murtagh
- King's College London, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Sweet L, Adamis D, Meagher DJ, Davis D, Currow DC, Bush SH, Barnes C, Hartwick M, Agar M, Simon J, Breitbart W, MacDonald N, Lawlor PG. Ethical challenges and solutions regarding delirium studies in palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014; 48:259-71. [PMID: 24388124 PMCID: PMC4082407 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.07.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2013] [Revised: 07/11/2013] [Accepted: 07/17/2013] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Delirium occurs commonly in settings of palliative care (PC), in which patient vulnerability in the unique context of end-of-life care and delirium-associated impairment of decision-making capacity may together present many ethical challenges. OBJECTIVES Based on deliberations at the Studies to Understand Delirium in Palliative Care Settings (SUNDIPS) meeting and an associated literature review, this article discusses ethical issues central to the conduct of research on delirious PC patients. METHODS Together with an analysis of the ethical deliberations at the SUNDIPS meeting, we conducted a narrative literature review by key words searching of relevant databases and a subsequent hand search of initially identified articles. We also reviewed statements of relevance to delirium research in major national and international ethics guidelines. RESULTS Key issues identified include the inclusion of PC patients in delirium research, capacity determination, and the mandate to respect patient autonomy and ensure maintenance of patient dignity. Proposed solutions include designing informed consent statements that are clear, concise, and free of complex phraseology; use of concise, yet accurate, capacity assessment instruments with a minimally burdensome schedule; and use of PC friendly consent models, such as facilitated, deferred, experienced, advance, and proxy models. CONCLUSION Delirium research in PC patients must meet the common standards for such research in any setting. Certain features unique to PC establish a need for extra diligence in meeting these standards and the employment of assessments, consent procedures, and patient-family interactions that are clearly grounded on the tenets of PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Sweet
- Division of Palliative Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - David J Meagher
- Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Cognitive Impairment Research Group, Department of Psychiatry, Graduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - Daniel Davis
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - David C Currow
- Discipline of Palliative and Supportive Services, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia; Flinders Centre for Clinical Change, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia
| | - Shirley H Bush
- Division of Palliative Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Palliative Care Unit, Bruyère Continuing Care, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christopher Barnes
- Division of Palliative Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Palliative Care Unit, Bruyère Continuing Care, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michael Hartwick
- Division of Palliative Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Division of Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Critical Care Response Team, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Meera Agar
- Discipline of Palliative and Supportive Services, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia; Department of Palliative Care, Braeside Hospital, HammondCare, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; South West Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jessica Simon
- Division of Palliative Medicine, Department of Oncology and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - William Breitbart
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Neil MacDonald
- Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Peter G Lawlor
- Division of Palliative Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
May P, Normand C, Morrison RS. Economic impact of hospital inpatient palliative care consultation: review of current evidence and directions for future research. J Palliat Med 2014; 17:1054-63. [PMID: 24984168 DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2013.0594] [Citation(s) in RCA: 117] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Maintaining the recent expansion of palliative care access in the United States is a recognized public health concern. Economic evaluation is essential to validate current provision and assess the case for new programs. Previous economic reviews in palliative care reported on programs across settings and systems; none has examined specifically the hospital consultative model, the dominant model of provision in the United States. OBJECTIVES To review systematically the economic evidence on specialist palliative care consultation teams in the hospital setting, to appraise this evidence critically, and to identify areas for future research in this field. DATA SOURCES A meta-review ("a review of existing reviews") was conducted of eight published systematic reviews and one relevant nonsystematic review. To identify articles published outside of the timeframe of these reviews, systematic searches were performed on the PubMed, CINAHL, and EconLit databases. STUDY SELECTION Articles were included if they compared the costs and/or cost effectiveness of a specialist hospital inpatient palliative care consultation for adult patients with those of a comparator. RESULTS Ten studies were included and these demonstrate a clear pattern of cost-saving impact from inpatient consultation programs. Nevertheless, knowledge gaps still exist regarding the economic effects of these programs. Current evidence has been generated from the hospital perspective; health system costs, patient and caregiver costs, and health outcomes are typically not included. CONCLUSIONS Inpatient palliative care consultation programs have been shown to save hospitals money and to provide improved care to patients with serious illness. With a clear pattern of cost-saving using current methodology, it is timely to begin expanding the scope of economic evaluation in this field. Future research must address the measurement of both costs and outcomes to understand more fully the role that palliative care plays in enhancing value in health care. Relevant domains for such research are identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter May
- 1 Centre for Health Policy and Management, Trinity College Dublin , Ireland
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
56
|
Leslie P, Sandsund C, Roe J. Researching the rehabilitation needs of patients with life-limiting disease: Challenges and opportunities. PROGRESS IN PALLIATIVE CARE 2014. [DOI: 10.1179/1743291x14y.0000000087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
|
57
|
Preston NJ, Fayers P, Walters SJ, Pilling M, Grande GE, Short V, Owen-Jones E, Evans CJ, Benalia H, Higginson IJ, Todd CJ. Recommendations for managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research: part of the MORECare research method guidance on statistical issues. Palliat Med 2013; 27:899-907. [PMID: 23652842 DOI: 10.1177/0269216313486952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Statistical analysis in palliative and end-of-life care research can be problematic due to high levels of missing data, attrition and response shift as disease progresses. AIM To develop recommendations about managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research data. DESIGN We used the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation approach to conduct a consultation workshop with experts in statistical methods in palliative and end-of-life care research. Following presentations and discussion, nominal group techniques were used to produce recommendations about attrition, missing data and response shift. These were rated online by experts and analysed using descriptive statistics for consensus and importance. RESULTS In total, 20 participants attended the workshop and 19 recommendations were subsequently ranked. There was broad agreement across recommendations. The top five recommendations were as follows: A taxonomy should be devised to define types of attrition. Types and amount of missing data should be reported with details of imputation methods. The pattern of missing data should be investigated to inform the imputation approach. A statistical analysis plan should be pre-specified in the protocol. High rates of attrition should be assumed when planning studies and specifying analyses. The leading recommendation for response shift was for more research. CONCLUSIONS When designing studies in palliative and end-of-life care, it is recommended that high rates of attrition should not be seen as indicative of poor design and that a clear statistical analysis plan is in place to account for missing data and attrition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy J Preston
- International Observatory on End of Life, Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
58
|
Evans CJ, Benalia H, Preston NJ, Grande G, Gysels M, Short V, Daveson BA, Bausewein C, Todd C, Higginson IJ. The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare International Consensus Workshop. J Pain Symptom Manage 2013; 46:925-37. [PMID: 23628515 PMCID: PMC3858887 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2012] [Revised: 01/16/2013] [Accepted: 01/28/2013] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT A major barrier to widening and sustaining palliative care service provision is the requirement for better selection and use of outcome measures. Service commissioning is increasingly based on patient, carer, and service outcomes as opposed to service activity. OBJECTIVES To generate recommendations and consensus for research in palliative and end-of-life care on the properties of the best outcome measures, enhancing the validity of proxy-reported data and optimal data collection time points. METHODS An international expert "workshop" was convened and an online consensus survey was undertaken using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation to generate recommendations and level of agreement. We focused on three areas: 1) measurement properties, 2) use of proxies, and 3) measurement timing. Data analysis comprised descriptive analysis of aggregate scores and collation of narrative comments. RESULTS There were 31 workshop attendees; 29 recommendations were included in the online survey, completed by 28 experts. The top three recommendations by area were the following: 1) the properties of the best outcome measures are responsive to change over time and capture clinically important data, 2) to enhance the validity of proxy data requires clear and specific guidelines to aid lay individuals' and/or professionals' completion of proxy measures, and 3) data collection time points need clear identification to establish a baseline. CONCLUSION Outcome measurement in palliative and end-of-life care requires the use of psychometrically robust measures that are clinically responsive, with defined data collection time points to establish a baseline and clear administration guidelines to complete proxy measures. To further the field requires clinical imperatives to more closely inform recommendations on outcome measurement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine J Evans
- Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
59
|
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Walshe
- Editor-in-Chief of Palliative Medicine International Observatory on End of Life Care, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
Higginson IJ, Evans CJ, Grande G, Preston N, Morgan M, McCrone P, Lewis P, Fayers P, Harding R, Hotopf M, Murray SA, Benalia H, Gysels M, Farquhar M, Todd C. Evaluating complex interventions in end of life care: the MORECare statement on good practice generated by a synthesis of transparent expert consultations and systematic reviews. BMC Med 2013; 11:111. [PMID: 23618406 PMCID: PMC3635872 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 227] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2012] [Accepted: 04/02/2013] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite being a core business of medicine, end of life care (EoLC) is neglected. It is hampered by research that is difficult to conduct with no common standards. We aimed to develop evidence-based guidance on the best methods for the design and conduct of research on EoLC to further knowledge in the field. METHODS The Methods Of Researching End of life Care (MORECare) project built on the Medical Research Council guidance on the development and evaluation of complex circumstances. We conducted systematic literature reviews, transparent expert consultations (TEC) involving consensus methods of nominal group and online voting, and stakeholder workshops to identify challenges and best practice in EoLC research, including: participation recruitment, ethics, attrition, integration of mixed methods, complex outcomes and economic evaluation. We synthesised all findings to develop a guidance statement on the best methods to research EoLC. RESULTS We integrated data from three systematic reviews and five TECs with 133 online responses. We recommend research designs extending beyond randomised trials and encompassing mixed methods. Patients and families value participation in research, and consumer or patient collaboration in developing studies can resolve some ethical concerns. It is ethically desirable to offer patients and families the opportunity to participate in research. Outcome measures should be short, responsive to change and ideally used for both clinical practice and research. Attrition should be anticipated in studies and may affirm inclusion of the relevant population, but careful reporting is necessitated using a new classification. Eventual implementation requires consideration at all stages of the project. CONCLUSIONS The MORECare statement provides 36 best practice solutions for research evaluating services and treatments in EoLC to improve study quality and set the standard for future research. The statement may be used alongside existing statements and provides a first step in setting common, much needed standards for evaluative research in EoLC. These are relevant to those undertaking research, trainee researchers, research funders, ethical committees and editors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irene J Higginson
- King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessmer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK
| | - Catherine J Evans
- King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessmer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK
| | - Gunn Grande
- School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Nancy Preston
- School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
- International Observatory on End of Life Care, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Physics Avenue, Lancaster, LA1 4YT, UK
| | - Myfanwy Morgan
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King’s College London, Capital House, Weston Street, London, SE1 3QD, UK
| | - Paul McCrone
- Department of Health Services and Population Research, King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, 16 De Crespingy Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK
| | - Penney Lewis
- King’s College London, Centre of Medical Law and Ethics, Dickson Poon School of Law, Strand, London, WC2R 2LS, UK
| | - Peter Fayers
- Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Cornhill Road, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK
- Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, Prinsesse Kristinasgt. 1, NO-7006, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Richard Harding
- King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessmer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK
| | - Matthew Hotopf
- Department of Psychological Medicine, King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Rd, London, SE5 9RJ, UK
| | - Scott A Murray
- Primary Palliative Care Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK
| | - Hamid Benalia
- King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessmer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK
| | - Marjolein Gysels
- King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessmer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK
- University of Amsterdam, Centre for Social Science and Global Health, Oudezijds Achterburgwal 185, Amsterdam, 1012 DK, The Netherlands
| | - Morag Farquhar
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 OSR, UK
| | - Chris Todd
- School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| |
Collapse
|