1
|
Okun MS, Marjenin T, Ekanayake J, Gilbert F, Doherty SP, Pilkington J, French J, Kubu C, Lázaro-Muñoz G, Denison T, Giordano J. Definition of Implanted Neurological Device Abandonment: A Systematic Review and Consensus Statement. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e248654. [PMID: 38687486 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.8654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Establishing a formal definition for neurological device abandonment has the potential to reduce or to prevent the occurrence of this abandonment. Objective To perform a systematic review of the literature and develop an expert consensus definition for neurological device abandonment. Evidence Review After a Royal Society Summit on Neural Interfaces (September 13-14, 2023), a systematic English language review using PubMed was undertaken to investigate extant definitions of neurological device abandonment. Articles were reviewed for relevance to neurological device abandonment in the setting of deep brain, vagal nerve, and spinal cord stimulation. This review was followed by the convening of an expert consensus group of physicians, scientists, ethicists, and stakeholders. The group summarized findings, added subject matter experience, and applied relevant ethics concepts to propose a current operational definition of neurological device abandonment. Data collection, study, and consensus development were done between September 13, 2023, and February 1, 2024. Findings The PubMed search revealed 734 total articles, and after review, 7 articles were found to address neurological device abandonment. The expert consensus group addressed findings as germane to neurological device abandonment and added personal experience and additional relevant peer-reviewed articles, addressed stakeholders' respective responsibilities, and operationally defined abandonment in the context of implantable neurotechnological devices. The group further addressed whether clinical trial failure or shelving of devices would constitute or be associated with abandonment as defined. Referential to these domains and dimensions, the group proposed a standardized definition for abandonment of active implantable neurotechnological devices. Conclusions and Relevance This study's consensus statement suggests that the definition for neurological device abandonment should entail failure to provide fundamental aspects of patient consent; fulfill reasonable responsibility for medical, technical, or financial support prior to the end of the device's labeled lifetime; and address any or all immediate needs that may result in safety concerns or device ineffectiveness and that the definition of abandonment associated with the failure of a research trial should be contingent on specific circumstances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael S Okun
- Department of Neurology, Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Gainesville, Florida
- Department of Neurosurgery, Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Gainesville, Florida
| | - Timothy Marjenin
- Musculoskeletal Clinical Regulatory Advisers, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Jinendra Ekanayake
- Department of Neurosurgery, National Guard Hospital, Riyadh, Saudia Arabia
- Department of Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
- Quetz Ltd, Chelmsford, England
| | | | - Sean P Doherty
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, England
- Amber Therapeutics Limited, London, England
| | | | | | - Cynthia Kubu
- Center for Neuro-Restoration, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz
- Center for Bioethics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
- Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Timothy Denison
- Amber Therapeutics Limited, London, England
- Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Departments of Engineering Sciences and Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England
| | - James Giordano
- Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Department of Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Defense Medical Ethics Center, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
- Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kang TW, Oh TW, Jeong SJ. Policy Analysis for Implementing Neuroethics in Korea's Brain Research Promotion Act. Exp Neurobiol 2023; 32:1-7. [PMID: 36919331 PMCID: PMC10017843 DOI: 10.5607/en22037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/18/2023] [Indexed: 03/16/2023] Open
Abstract
In 1998, Korea implemented the Brain Research Promotion Act (BRPA), a law to revamp the field of neuroscience at the national level. However, despite numerous revisions including the definition and classification of neuroscience and the national plans for the training and education systems, the governance for neuroethics has not been integrated into the Act. The ethical issues raised by neuroscience and neurotechnology remain unchallenged, especially given the focus on the industrial purpose of the technology. In the current study, we analyzed the BRPA revision process by using Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework to determine the problems faced by the process. We propose a new strategy, including neuroethics governance and a national committee, to promote interdisciplinary neuroscience research and strengthen neuroethics in Korea.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tae-Woo Kang
- Korea Brain Research Institute, Daegu 41062, Korea.,Department of Police, Kyungil University, Gyeongsan 38428, Korea
| | - Tai-Won Oh
- Department of Police, Kyungil University, Gyeongsan 38428, Korea
| | | |
Collapse
|