What's end of life got to do with it? Research ethics with populations at life's end

Ethical and Methodological Challenges in Research with Hard-to-Reach Groups: Examples from Research on Family Caregivers for Migrant Older Adults Living with Dementia

Family caregivers of migrants with dementia constitute a population group that is hard to reach for research participation due to factors such as shame about the disease and past experiences of discrimination. In this article, research-ethical challenges associated with participant recruitment and qualitative data collection among relatives of migrants with dementia are discussed. Over a period of 8 years, 3 studies were conducted to investigate the experiences of family caregivers for persons with dementia of Turkish descent in Germany. Across these studies, a total of 32 family caregivers were interviewed. In this article, based on the “Principles of Biomedical Ethics” according to Beauchamp and Childress (2009), research-ethical conflicts associated with sampling methods and the presence of third parties during qualitative interviews are discussed. The potential risks emanating from sampling strategies and the presence of third parties during interviews regarding the voluntary nature of study participation are examined. Additionally, this article formulates recommendations for ensuring truly voluntary participation and protecting both the participants (family caregivers) and relatives with dementia from harm. These practical recommendations aim to help future researchers to avoid ethical pitfalls and represent a roadmap for making necessary methodological decisions.

Should end-of-life patients be enrolled as participants in clinical research? A best-fit framework synthesis

AIM

To identify and appraise evidence about ethical concerns regarding conducting medical research with end-of-life patients.

DESIGN

A best-fit framework synthesis of the literature regarding ethical issues in research involving adult patients at the end of life was conducted.

DATA SOURCES

Five databases were searched (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsychINFO) between January 2000-August 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Data were synthesized and categorized according to the moral positions described by Foster.

RESULTS

In all, 18 papers that met the inclusion criteria were included in this review. These papers provided rich knowledge not only about various ethical objections to researching the end of life but also about the social, moral, and clinical requirements to perform rigorous studies on clinical interventions in this field.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on people at end of life is not an unsolvable ethical dilemma between providing the best possible care and enhancing new therapies. It is important to find a balance between the moral duties of providing care and achieving research outcomes that are rigorous and meaningful for service users.

IMPACT

Research ethics committees can be challenged by the evaluation of human research. This review provides up-to-date evidence on key challenges and ethical considerations about researching with end-of-life patients.

SUMMARY STATEMENT

This study is a review of relevant evidence and key ethical challenges and issues around palliative and end-of-life research. Our findings provided important recommendations for clinicians, research, and ethics committee members when evaluating clinical research with people at their end of life.

Feasibility of conducting prospective observational research on critically ill, dying patients in the intensive care unit

Studying patients during the end of life is important, as it has the potential to lead to improvements in care for the dying. For patients who die after a controlled withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in the intensive care unit, information about the natural history of death and the process of removing life support has additionally led to advances in practice for deceased organ donation. However, this unique population of severely critically ill and imminently dying patients has been difficult to study, largely due to assumptions made by research teams and ethics boards alike about the logistical difficulties of obtaining consent and completing research procedures before or during the process of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. In this paper, we describe the ethics substudy of the first prospective observational research study in Canada to obtain consent and collect clinical data on patients during the process of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in the intensive care unit. We describe in detail the process of protocol development, review by five institutional research ethics boards and bedside staff satisfaction with the study. We conclude that prospective research on a critically ill and imminently dying population is feasible and can be conducted in an ethical manner. Further information is needed about the experiences and motivations of families and substitute decision makers who provide consent for research on critically ill intensive care unit patients at the end of life.

Application of Community-Based Participatory Research Methods to a Study of Complementary Medicine Interventions at End of Life

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles can be successfully applied to the design and implementation of a complementary medicine study for adults with end-stage AIDS. The Yale Prevention Research Center partnered with Leeway, Inc., an AIDS-dedicated nursing facility, and other academic and clinical entities to conduct a randomized, controlled pilot trial of meditation and massage on quality of life at the end of life. Using CBPR principles, a methodology was developed that was scientifically rigorous, highly respectful, and acceptable to the 91% minority study population. Using continuous, open communication among all involved parties, challenges were satisfactorily addressed in a timely manner. Fifty-eight residents (97% of those eligible) with end-stage AIDS participated from November 2001 to September 2003. Subjects received 1-month interventions of meditation, massage, combined meditation and massage, or standard care. The study of quality-of-life in end-stage AIDS poses unique challenges well met by applying CBPR principles to an academic-community research partnership.

Factors Associated with Participation, Active Refusals and Reasons for Not Taking Part in a Mortality Followback Survey Evaluating End-of-Life Care

BACKGROUND

Examination of factors independently associated with participation in mortality followback surveys is rare, even though these surveys are frequently used to evaluate end-of-life care. We aimed to identify factors associated with 1) participation versus non-participation and 2) provision of an active refusal versus a silent refusal; and systematically examine reasons for refusal in a population-based mortality followback survey.

METHODS

Postal survey about the end-of-life care received by 1516 people who died from cancer (aged ≥18), identified through death registrations in London, England (response rate 39.3%). The informant of death (a relative in 95.3% of cases) was contacted 4-10 months after the patient died. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with participation/active refusals and content analysis to examine refusal reasons provided by 205 nonparticipants.

FINDINGS

The odds of partaking were higher for patients aged 90+ (AOR 3.48, 95%CI: 1.52-8.00, ref: 20-49yrs) and female informants (AOR 1.70, 95%CI: 1.33-2.16). Odds were lower for hospital deaths (AOR 0.62, 95%CI: 0.46-0.84, ref: home) and proxies other than spouses/partners (AORs 0.28 to 0.57). Proxies of patients born overseas were less likely to provide an active refusal (AOR 0.49; 95% CI: 0.32-0.77). Refusal reasons were often multidimensional, most commonly study-related (36.0%), proxy-related and grief-related (25.1% each). One limitation of this analysis is the large number of nonparticipants who did not provide reasons for refusal (715/920).

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey better reached proxies of older patients while those dying in hospitals were underrepresented. Proxy characteristics played a role, with higher participation from women and spouses/partners. More information is needed about the care received by underrepresented groups. Study design improvements may guide future questionnaire development and help develop strategies to increase response rates.

Advancing the science of hospice care: Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is very little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in hospice care. In the areas of medical therapy, patient-centered and family-centered outcomes, and patient safety, there are numerous high-impact questions for which answers are needed. Although randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for research, such trials are difficult, time consuming, and expensive to conduct in a hospice population. Moreover, they cannot examine the implementation of therapies in real-world settings. Therefore, there is a need for novel, complementary approaches to research in this unique population.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article describes the initial experience of the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE). CHOICE is a national network of hospices that use electronic health record-based data collection procedures to answer key questions relevant to clinical care and policy. By using a rich source of existing data to conduct observational studies, CHOICE is able to overcome many of the most significant challenges of randomized controlled trials in hospice. However, this approach also created unique challenges related to governance and privacy concerns.

SUMMARY

CHOICE is a growing research network that has the potential to make a contribution to the science of palliative care in a hospice population.

Five things physicians and patients should question in hospice and palliative medicine

Overuse or misuse of tests and treatments exposes patients to potential harm. The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely® campaign is a multiyear effort to encourage physician leadership in reducing harmful or inappropriate resource utilization. Via the campaign, medical societies are asked to identify five tests or procedures commonly used in their field, the routine use of which in specific clinical scenarios should be questioned by both physicians and patients based on the evidence that the test or procedure is ineffective or even harmful. The American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) was invited, and it agreed to participate in the campaign. The AAHPM Choosing Wisely Task Force, with input from the AAHPM membership, developed the following five recommendations: 1) Don't recommend percutaneous feeding tubes in patients with advanced dementia; instead, offer oral-assisted feeding; 2) Don't delay palliative care for a patient with serious illness who has physical, psychological, social, or spiritual distress because they are pursuing disease-directed treatment; 3) Don't leave an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator activated when it is inconsistent with the patient/family goals of care; 4) Don't recommend more than a single fraction of palliative radiation for an uncomplicated painful bone metastasis; and 5) Don't use topical lorazepam (Ativan®), diphenhydramine (Benadryl®), and haloperidol (Haldol®) (ABH) gel for nausea. These recommendations and their supporting rationale should be considered by physicians, patients, and their caregivers as they collaborate in choosing those treatments that do the most good and avoid the most harm for those living with serious illness.

Review: a narrative review of the published ethical debates in palliative care research and an assessment of their adequacy to inform research governance

The quality of research, and the resulting quality of evidence available to guide palliative care, is dependent on the ethical decisions underpinning its design, conduct and report. Whilst much has been published debating the ethics of palliative care research, an assessment of the quality and synthesis of the central debates is not available. Such a review is timely to inform research governance. The methodology of this study is based on the principles of systematic reviews. Fifty-seven papers were reviewed following a thorough search, and were critically appraised for their literary quality, the knowledge on which they drew and the research standards they addressed. The debates identified address vulnerability, moral appropriateness, consent, gate-keeping and inclusion and research culture. The quality of debate and the sources of knowledge varied. The debate was rich in quality and knowledge with respect to the protection of the dignity, rights and safety of research participants, but less developed in relation to those of researchers and other staff. There is also little debate about the ethics of reporting of research and the ethics underpinning research leadership. A framework is offered that reconciles the ethical issues raised with potential methodological strategies identified from the review.

Research participation by older adults at end of life: barriers and solutions

The purpose of this article is to elaborate on barriers to research participation by older adults at end of life. We focus on the hospice setting and classify barriers to research participation into six domains: societal attitudes toward death, research procedures, health care organizations, agency staff, patients' families and caregivers, and patient characteristics. We characterize particular participation issues, uncertainties in participation for individuals with advanced illness, and infringements on patient self-determination, as well as potential solutions to these research challenges. Our observation of the complex palliative context includes the realization that a singular change will not have large enough impact on participation. We conclude that, along with the responsibility to expand the research base addressing the needs of dying individuals, there is also a need to understand the challenges of implementing research projects with older adults at end of life.

Challenges in conducting end-of-life research in critical care

Critical care units present some unique challenges to the researcher, especially when the research topic of interest is related to end-of-life care. The purpose of this article is to address some of the methodological and practical issues related to conducting end-of-life research in the critical care setting. Recruitment barriers include gaining access to a clinical site, gaining access to patients, and prognostic uncertainty. Additional barriers include challenges related to informed consent, data collection, the research team, and ethical considerations. Strategies are described that can be used to guide researchers to conduct end-of-life research successfully in critical care.

Identifying and responding to ethical and methodological issues in after-death interviews with next-of-kin

After-death research with next-of-kin can enhance our understanding of end-of-life care and translate into better services for dying persons and their survivors. This article describes ethical and methodological issues that emerged in a pilot of a face-to-face interview guide designed to elicit next-of-kin's perceptions of end-of-life care. The pilot study was part of a larger Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research protocol to improve end-of-life care in VA Medical Centers. By deconstructing the research process from an ethical perspective and engaging in critical self-assessment, the authors aim to inform other researchers of potential problems involved in after-death research with next-of-kin.

Should research be part of advance care planning?

Advance care planning is a process to help people to formulate and communicate their preferences regarding future care during critical illness. Reviews of the advance care planning process in its current form have been disappointing. Improvements in care at the end of life and palliative care are necessary for the provision of modern medical care. Medical research has led to many improvements at the physiological and technological levels. It is only by applying the same rigour of scientific study and research ethics that improvements in the advance care planning process can be made.