Surrogate consent for dementia research: a national survey of older Americans

Sleep disturbances and interrelationship between persons with dementia and family caregivers: The lived experiences of Korean American Dyads

BACKGROUND

Little research has investigated sleep quality in dyadic interrelationships between persons with dementia (PWD) and family caregivers, particularly among immigrant ethnic minorities, such as Korean Americans.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to describe lived experiences of sleep disturbances and sleep interrelationships between Korean American PWD and their family caregivers.

METHODS

A descriptive qualitative design used semi-structured interviews with cohabitating PWD-caregiver dyads.

RESULTS

Eleven Korean American dyads participated (PWD mean age: 82.7, SD=2.3; caregivers mean age: 69.1, SD=10.2). Major themes included (1) linked sleep disturbances between PWD and caregivers, (2) interrelationship in dyads, (3) language challenges within and outside the dyads, and (4) strategies that improve sleep quality for dyads.

CONCLUSION

Findings demonstrated bidirectional influences in dyadic sleep disturbances, where caregiving reciprocally impacted PWD sleep as part of an interactional unit. Communication barriers and limited community resources posed challenges for these dyads. Future sleep interventions should consider culturally competent, dyadic approaches.

Barriers to Using Legally Authorized Representatives in Clinical Research with Older Adults

Background

Older adults are at increased risk of cognitive impairments including Alzheimer's disease dementia. Legally authorized representatives (LARs) can provide informed consent when a participant is no longer able to, but little is known about barriers to incorporating them in research.

Objective

Explore reasons for not asking and documenting participant decisions to appoint LARs among researchers conducting clinical intervention trials studying older adults or individuals with cognitive impairments.

Methods

Mixed method design consisting of a survey (N = 1,284) and qualitative interviews (N = 40) regarding barriers to incorporating LARs. Participants were principal investigators and clinical research coordinators.

Results

37% (N = 469) had not asked and documented participant decisions about appointing LARs in the prior year. They had significantly lower confidence in resources available to incorporate LARs and lower positive attitudes compared to their counterparts who had done so. The majority (83%) had no trials studying individuals with cognitive impairments and reported LARs were not applicable. A minority (17%) had at least one trial studying individuals with cognitive impairments and reported being unaware of LARs. Qualitative findings indicate discomfort broaching a sensitive topic especially with individuals who are not yet impaired.

Conclusion

Resources and education to increase awareness and knowledge of LARs are needed. Researchers studying older adults should, at minimum, have the knowledge and resources to incorporate LARs when necessary. Stigma and discomfort discussing LARs will need to be overcome, as early proactive discussions before a participant loses decisional capacity could enhance participant autonomy and facilitate recruitment and retention of older adults to research.

Attitudes of legal guardians and legally supervised persons with and without previous research experience towards participation in research projects: A quantitative cross-sectional study

Background

Vulnerable groups, e.g. persons with mental illness, neurological deficits or dementia, are often excluded as participants from research projects because obtaining informed consent can be difficult and tedious. This may have the consequence that vulnerable groups benefit less from medical progress. Vulnerable persons are often supported by a legal guardian in one or more demands of their daily life. We examined the attitudes of legal guardians and legally supervised persons towards medical research and the conditions and motivations to participate in studies.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study with standardized surveys of legal guardians and legally supervised persons. Two separate questionnaires were developed for the legal guardians and the supervised persons to asses previous experiences with research projects and the reasons for participation or non-participation. The legal guardians were recruited through various guardianship organizations. The supervised persons were recruited through their legal guardian and from a previous study among psychiatric patients. The data were analysed descriptively.

Results

Alltogether, 82 legal guardians and 20 legally supervised persons could be recruited. Thereof 13 legal guardians (15.6%) and 13 legally supervised persons (65.0%) had previous experience with research projects. The majority of the guardians with experience in research projects had consented the participation of their supervised persons (n = 12 guardians, 60.0%; in total n = 16 approvals). The possible burden on the participating person was given as the most frequent reason not to participate both by the guardians (n = 44, 54.4%) and by the supervised persons (n = 3, 30.0%). The most frequent motivation to provide consent to participate in a research study was the desire to help other patients by gaining new scientific knowledge (guardians: n = 125, 78.1%; supervised persons: n = 10, 66.6%).

Conclusions

Overall, an open attitude towards medical research can be observed both among legal guardians and supervised persons. Perceived risks and no sense recognized in the study are reasons for not participating in medical research projects.

Resources, methods, and data infrastructure to promote research in dementia care, caregiving, and services

BACKGROUND

The National Institute on Aging, in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services as part of the National Alzheimer's Project Act, hosted a 2020 Dementia Care, Caregiving, and Services Research Summit Virtual Meeting Series on August 13, 2020. This article reflects three presentations related to Theme 6: Research Resources, Methods, and Data Infrastructure. Dr. Bynum discussed the challenges of identifying people for population- and healthcare-based research, including how definitions of dementia have changed over time, the opportunities and challenges inherent in the use of electronic data sources, and the need to fit data collection strategies to research goals and questions. Dr. Travison provided an overview on the growing use of embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) and how to enhance their impact in dementia research. Dr. Wendler presented on the ethical considerations relevant to consent for dementia research, including assessment of decisional capacity and the role of decisional surrogates.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of claims data, electronic health records, and other sources of "existing" data has made the use and development of ePCTs both easier and more appealing. Among other things, they offer advantages in terms of lower cost and generalizability to real-world settings. This is turn has necessitated the use of informatic and analytic approaches to account for some of the limitations and complexities of such data, including multilevel clustering and the need to link and jointly analyze data from the person with dementia and those of their care partner. As part of this process, it will be important to broaden the scope of who is assessed for decisional capacity, make those assessments more study specific, and assist surrogates in making decisions based on what the individual would have chosen for themselves if capacitated (i.e., substituted judgment).

Medical Decision-Making in Oncology for Patients Lacking Capacity

Modern oncology practice is built upon the idea that a patient with cancer has the legal and ethical right to make decisions about their medical care. There are situations in which patients might no longer be fully able to make decisions on their own behalf, however, and some patients never were able to do so. In such cases, it is critical to be aware of how to determine if a patient has the ability to make medical decisions and what should be done if they do not. In this article, we examine the concept of decision-making capacity in oncology and explore situations in which patients may have altered/diminished capacity (e.g., depression, cognitive impairment, delirium, brain tumor, brain metastases, etc.) or never had decisional capacity (e.g., minor children or developmentally disabled adults). We describe fundamental principles to consider when caring for a patient with cancer who lacks decisional capacity. We then introduce strategies for capacity assessment and discuss how clinicians might navigate scenarios in which their patients could lack capacity to make decisions about their cancer care. Finally, we explore ways in which pediatric and medical oncology can learn from one another with regard to these challenging situations.

The Attitudes of Relatives of ICU Patients toward Informed Consent for Clinical Research

Background

Informed consent is a key ethical requirement for biomedical research that is implemented to ensure autonomy and voluntary participation. However, patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) may be unconscious or severely ill and thus lack the capacity for decisions about research participation. Thus, relatives or guardians are usually asked to provide informed consent prior to the inclusion of ICU patients in research.

Aims

This study aimed to assess the attitudes and preferences of relatives of ICU patients toward informed consent in biomedical research in Jordan. Subjects and Methods. A sample of 184 relatives with a critically ill next of kin in the ICU was anonymously surveyed regarding their attitudes and preferences toward giving informed consent for biomedical research on behalf of their patients.

Results

The study showed that the majority of relatives had a positive attitude toward the informed consent process on behalf of their patients in the ICU (72.3%). The perception that participation in research would be directly beneficial to their patient was the most significant reason to provide informed consent among relatives. The degree of relatedness to the patient was significantly associated with the decision to provide informed consent on behalf of the patients in the ICU. Additionally, more than 70% of the relatives strongly agreed to take part in clinical research if they were to be unconscious patients in the ICU. Moreover, the majority of the respondents agreed that their first-degree relatives would give consent on their behalf.

Conclusion

Relatives with a critically ill next of kin in the ICU had positive attitudes toward providing informed consent on behalf of their patients. This was motivated by the direct benefit from the research to their patient.

Older Persons' and Their Caregivers' Perspectives and Experiences of Research Participation With Impaired Decision-Making Capacity: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Human research ethics statements support equitable inclusion of diverse groups. Yet older people are under-represented in clinical research, especially those with impaired decision-making capacity. The aim of this study was to identify perspectives and experiences of older persons and their caregivers of research participation with impaired decision-making capacity.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Scoping review of literature and online sources in January-February 2019 (updated June 2020) according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. English-language peer-reviewed research articles and Australian online narratives were included. Data were tabulated and narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

From 4171 database records and 93 online resources, 22 articles (2000-2019, 82% United States, 16 first authors) and one YouTube webinar (2018) were initially included; updated searches yielded an additional article (2020) and YouTube webinar (2020). Studies were heterogeneous in terminology, methods and foci, with hypothetical scenarios, quantitative analyses and examination of proxy consent predominating. Participants (n=7331) were older persons (71%), caregivers of older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (23%) and older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (6%). Synthesis identified two themes: willingness to participate and decision-making approaches.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Research participation by older persons with dementia may be optimized through reducing risks and burdens and increasing benefits for participants, greater consumer input into study development, and shared and supported decision-making. Older persons' and caregivers' perspectives and experiences of research participation with impaired decision-making capacity require investigation in a greater range of countries and conditions other than dementia, and dissemination through more varied media.

Processes of consent in research for adults with impaired mental capacity nearing the end of life: systematic review and transparent expert consultation (MORECare_Capacity statement)

BACKGROUND

Involving adults lacking capacity (ALC) in research on end of life care (EoLC) or serious illness is important, but often omitted. We aimed to develop evidence-based guidance on how best to include individuals with impaired capacity nearing the end of life in research, by identifying the challenges and solutions for processes of consent across the capacity spectrum.

METHODS

Methods Of Researching End of Life Care_Capacity (MORECare_C) furthers the MORECare statement on research evaluating EoLC. We used simultaneous methods of systematic review and transparent expert consultation (TEC). The systematic review involved four electronic databases searches. The eligibility criteria identified studies involving adults with serious illness and impaired capacity, and methods for recruitment in research, implementing the research methods, and exploring public attitudes. The TEC involved stakeholder consultation to discuss and generate recommendations, and a Delphi survey and an expert 'think-tank' to explore consensus. We narratively synthesised the literature mapping processes of consent with recruitment outcomes, solutions, and challenges. We explored recommendation consensus using descriptive statistics. Synthesis of all the findings informed the guidance statement.

RESULTS

Of the 5539 articles identified, 91 met eligibility. The studies encompassed people with dementia (27%) and in palliative care (18%). Seventy-five percent used observational designs. Studies on research methods (37 studies) focused on processes of proxy decision-making, advance consent, and deferred consent. Studies implementing research methods (30 studies) demonstrated the role of family members as both proxy decision-makers and supporting decision-making for the person with impaired capacity. The TEC involved 43 participants who generated 29 recommendations, with consensus that indicated. Key areas were the timeliness of the consent process and maximising an individual's decisional capacity. The think-tank (n = 19) refined equivocal recommendations including supporting proxy decision-makers, training practitioners, and incorporating legislative frameworks.

CONCLUSIONS

The MORECare_C statement details 20 solutions to recruit ALC nearing the EoL in research. The statement provides much needed guidance to enrol individuals with serious illness in research. Key is involving family members early and designing study procedures to accommodate variable and changeable levels of capacity. The statement demonstrates the ethical imperative and processes of recruiting adults across the capacity spectrum in varying populations and settings.

Motivations for people with cognitive impairment to complete an advance research directive - a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Research with persons with dementia is important to better understand the causes of dementia and to develop more effective diagnostics, therapies, and preventive measures. Advance Research Directives (ARDs) have been suggested as a possible solution to include persons with dementia in research in an ethically sound way. Little is known about how people, especially those affected by cognitive impairment, understand and regard the use of ARDs, as empirical studies are mainly conducted with healthy, non-cognitively impaired, participants.

METHODS

This qualitative study, a sub-study of a larger study on the evaluation of ARDs in the context of dementia research in Germany, consists of semi-structured in-depth interviews with 24 persons with cognitive impairment.

RESULTS

Our results indicate that most participants consider ARDs a valuable tool for allowing them to make their own decisions. Many would prefer to draft an ARD when they are still healthy or soon after the diagnosis of cognitive impairment. Participants suggested that the completion of ARDs can be advanced with the provision of practical support and increased dissemination of information on ARDs in society.

CONCLUSION

Persons with subjective or mild cognitive impairment (SCI/MCI) suggested several motivating factors and concerns for completing an ARD. Clinicians need to be trained to accommodate patients' needs for sufficient and adequate information. Furthermore, a standardised, partly pre-formulated template could be helpful for drafting an ARD. As such tested templates are currently not yet available, this addresses the urgent need for more translational and implementation research for the use of ARDs.

Impact of Cognitive Impairment Across Specialties: Summary of a Report From the U13 Conference Series

Although declines in cognitive capacity are assumed to be a characteristic of aging, increasing evidence shows that it is age-related disease, rather than age itself, that causes cognitive impairment. Even so, older age is a primary risk factor for cognitive decline, and with individuals living longer as a result of medical advances, cognitive impairment and dementia are increasing in prevalence. On March 26 to 27, 2018, the American Geriatrics Society convened a conference in Bethesda, MD, to explore cognitive impairment across the subspecialties. Bringing together representatives from several subspecialties, this was the third of three conferences, supported by a U13 grant from the National Institute on Aging, to aid recipients of Grants for Early Medical/Surgical Specialists' Transition to Aging Research (GEMSSTAR) in integrating geriatrics into their subspecialties. Scientific sessions focused on the impact of cognitive impairment, sensory contributors, comorbidities, links between delirium and dementia, and issues of informed consent in cognitively impaired populations. Discussions highlighted the complexity not only of cognitive health itself, but also of the bidirectional relationship between cognitive health and the health of other organ systems. Thus, conference participants noted the importance of multidisciplinary team science in future aging research. This article summarizes the full conference report, "The Impact of Cognitive Impairment Across Specialties," and notes areas where GEMSSTAR scholars can contribute to progress as they embark on their careers in aging research. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2011-2017, 2019.

Do human subject safeguards matter to potential participants in psychiatric genetic research?

Despite longstanding concerns about the adequacy of human research protections in mental illness investigations, minimal work has focused on the perspectives of key stakeholders regarding these safeguards. This investigation examined the perspectives of potential research participants regarding safeguards for psychiatric genetic research. Individuals with mental illness (n = 71), first-degree family members of individuals with mental illness (n = 54), and individuals with no personal or close family history of mental illness (n = 57) provided responses to items regarding perceptions of: 1) protectiveness of a range of research safeguards in genetic research on mental illness; 2) influence of these safeguards on research participation decision-making; and 3) importance of these safeguards depending on the nature of the research (i.e., genetic vs. non-genetic mental illness research; and genetic research on mental illness vs. physical illness). Potential research participants perceived existing safeguard procedures as generally protective. The three groups did not differ in their ratings of protectiveness, with the exception of the safeguard domain of "Informed Consent or Alternative Decision-Making Procedures," which was viewed as more protective by family members of people with mental illness than by individuals with mental illness or comparison participants. Safeguard procedures were perceived as strongly influential with respect to willingness to enroll in psychiatric genetic research. These findings suggest that the presence of safeguards positively influences enrollment decision-making by research volunteers and indicate that potential psychiatric genetic research participants find safeguards to be protective, underscoring the responsibility to implement safeguard practices conscientiously.

Procedural Framework to Facilitate Hospital-Based Informed Consent for Dementia Research

Improving quality and delivery of care for people with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) requires a comprehensive research agenda that encompasses the entire care continuum. Logistical and ethical challenges of informed consent for research participation of persons with ADRD include determination of capacity to consent, surrogate consent when capacity to consent is compromised, timely identification of the legally authorized representative (LAR) providing surrogate consent, and balancing residual autonomy with surrogate consent. Short stays; limited access to patients, caregivers, and LARs; and fluctuating influences of acute illness on capacity determination compound these challenges in the acute care setting. To address these challenges, we worked with the University of Wisconsin Health Sciences Institutional Review Board to develop a procedural framework for obtaining informed consent from hospitalized individuals with ADRD and their caregivers to participate in a minimal risk care intervention. The framework is specially designed for minimal risk situations in which rapid enrollment is a necessity and uses rapid identification of surrogates to consent for patients who lack legal capacity to make medical decisions, indicated by an activated healthcare power of attorney, and individualized formal assent procedures for patients who lack capacity to consent. These methods were proven effective in facilitating hospital-based recruitment in an ongoing randomized controlled trial and provide a basis for increasing access to acute care clinical research for persons with ADRD. Bolstering research participation through more easily used consent procedures during acute illness is critical to fostering improvements in the delivery of high-quality care to persons with ADRD. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2243-2248, 2018.

Ethical understandings of proxy decision making for research involving adults lacking capacity: A systematic review (framework synthesis) of empirical research

BACKGROUND

Research involving adults lacking mental capacity relies on the involvement of a proxy or surrogate, although this raises a number of ethical concerns. Empirical studies have examined attitudes towards proxy decision-making, proxies' authority as decision-makers, decision accuracy, and other relevant factors. However, a comprehensive evidence-based account of proxy decision-making is lacking. This systematic review provides a synthesis of the empirical data reporting the ethical issues surrounding decisions made by research proxies, and the development of a conceptual framework of proxy decision-making for research.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched using a combination of search terms, and empirical data from eligible studies were retrieved. The review followed the framework synthesis approach to refine and develop a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included in the review. Two dimensions of proxy decision-making emerged. The ethical framing criteria of decision-making used by proxies: use of a substituted judgement, use of a best interests approach, combination of substituted judgement and best interests, and 'something else', and the active elements of proxy decision-making: 'knowing the person', patient-proxy relationship, accuracy of the decision, and balancing risks, benefits and burdens, and attitudes towards proxy decision-making. Interactions between the framing criteria and the elements of decision-making are complex and contextually-situated.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this systematic review challenge the accepted reductionist account of proxy decision-making. Decision-making by research proxies is highly contextualized and multifactorial in nature. The choice of proxy and the relational features of decision-making play a fundamental role: both in providing the proxy's authority as decision-maker, and guiding the decision-making process. The conceptual framework describes the relationship between the framing criteria used by the proxy, and the active elements of decision-making. Further work to develop, and empirically test the proposed framework is needed.

Advance directives as a tool to respect patients' values and preferences: discussion on the case of Alzheimer's disease

Background

The proposal of the new criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) based on biomarker data is making possible a diagnosis of AD at the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or predementia/prodromal– stage. Given the present lack of effective treatments for AD, the opportunity for the individuals to personally take relevant decisions and plan for their future before and if cognitive deterioration occurs is one the main advantages of an early diagnosis.

Main body

Advance directives are largely seen as an effective tool for planning medical care in the event the subject becomes incompetent. Nevertheless, their value has been questioned with regard to people with dementia by scholars who refer to the arguments of personal identity and of patient’s changing interests before and after the onset of dementia.

In this paper, I discuss the value of advance directives in Alzheimer’s disease and other kind of dementia. Despite critics, I argue that advance directives are especially advisable in dementia and provide reasons in favor of their promotion at an early stage of the disease as a valuable tool to respect patients’ values and preferences on medical treatment, including participation in research and end of life decisions. I mainly support advance directives that include both decisions regarding health care and the appointment of an attorney in fact.

Conclusion

I conclude that patients with AD at a prodromal or early stage should be offered the opportunity to execute an advance directive, and that not to honor a demented individual’s directive would be an unacceptable form of discrimination towards those patients.

Assessing capacity to consent for research in cognitively impaired older patients

Background

The number of clinical trials including older patients, and particularly patients with cognitive impairment, is increasing. While statutory provisions exist to make sure that the capacity to consent is assessed systematically for each patient, many gray areas remain with regard to how this assessment is made or should be made in the routine practice of clinical research.

Objectives

The aim of this review was to draw up an inventory of assessment tools evaluating older patients’ capacity to consent specifically applicable to clinical research, which could be used in routine practice.

Methods

Two authors independently searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar data-bases between November 2015 and January 2016. The search was actualized in April 2017. We used keywords (MeSH terms and text words) referring to informed consent, capacity to consent, consent for research, research ethics, cognitive impairment, vulnerable older patients, and assessment tools. Existing reviews were also considered.

Results

Among the numerous existing tools for assessing capacity to consent, 14 seemed potentially suited for clinical research and six were evaluated in older patients. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) was the most frequently cited.

Conclusion

The MacCAT-CR is currently the most used and the best validated questionnaire. However, it appears difficult to use and time-consuming. A more recent tool, the University of California Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC), seems interesting for routine practice because of its simplicity, relevance, and applicability in older patients.

Informed Consent to Research with Cognitively Impaired Adults: Transdisciplinary Challenges and Opportunities

Due to issues related to informed research consent, older adults with cognitive impairments are often excluded from high-quality studies that are not directly related to cognitive impairment, which has led to a dearth of evidence for this population. The challenges to including cognitively impaired older adults in research and the implications of their exclusion are a transdisciplinary issue. The ethical challenges and logistical barriers to conducting research with cognitively impaired older adults are addressed from the perspectives of three different fields-social work, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery. Issues related to funding, study design, intervention components, and outcomes are discussed through the unique experiences of three different providers. A fourth perspective-medical research ethics-provides alternatives to exclusion when conducting research with cognitively impaired older adults such as timing, corrective feedback and plain language, and capacity assessment and proxy appointments. Given the increasing aging population and the lack of evidence on cognitively impaired older adults, it is critical that researchers, funders, and institutional review boards not be dissuaded from including this population in research studies.

Is Safety in the Eye of the Beholder? Safeguards in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Human subjects research has a core commitment to participant well-being. This obligation is accentuated for once exploited populations such as adults with intellectual disability. Yet we know little about the public's views on appropriate safeguards for this population. We surveyed adults with intellectual disability, family members and friends, disability service providers, researchers, and Institutional Review Board (IRB) members to compare views on safeguards. We found many points of convergence of views, particularly for decision-making and participation. One trend is that adults with intellectual disability perceive greater safety in being engaged directly in recruitment, and recruitment by specific individuals. Researchers and IRB members need to consider community views to facilitate the safe and respectful inclusion of adults with intellectual disability.

Surrogate consent to non-beneficial research: erring on the right side when substituted judgments may be inaccurate

Part of the standard protection of decisionally incapacitated research subjects is a prohibition against enrolling them unless surrogate decision makers authorize it. A common view is that surrogates primarily ought to make their decisions based on what the decisionally incapacitated subject would have wanted regarding research participation. However, empirical studies indicate that surrogate predictions about such preferences are not very accurate. The focus of this article is the significance of surrogate accuracy in the context of research that is not expected to benefit the research subject. We identify three morally relevant asymmetries between being enrolled and not being enrolled in such non-beneficial research, and conclude that when there is a non-negligible probability that surrogates' predictions are wrong, it will generally be better to err on the side of not authorizing enrollment.

Why are spousal caregivers more prevalent than nonspousal caregivers as study partners in AD dementia clinical trials?

OBJECTIVES

Most Alzheimer disease (AD) caregivers are not spouses and yet most AD dementia trials enroll spousal study partners. This study examines the association between caregiver relationship to the patient and willingness to enroll in an AD clinical trial and how caregiver burden and research attitudes modify willingness.

DESIGN

Interviews with 103 AD caregivers who met criteria for ability to serve as a study partner.

RESULTS

A total of 54% of caregivers were spouses or domestic partners and the remaining were adult children. Willingness to enroll a patient in a clinical trial was associated with being a spouse [odds ratio (OR)=2.53, P=0.01], increasing age (OR=1.39, P=0.01), and increasing scores on the Research Attitudes Questionnaire (OR=1.39, P<0.001). No measures of caregiver burden or patient health were significant predictors of willingness. In multivariate models both research attitudes (OR=1.37, P<0.001) and being a spouse, as opposed to an adult child, (OR=2.06, P=0.048) were independently associated with willingness to participate.

CONCLUSIONS

Spousal caregivers had both a higher willingness to participate and a more positive attitude toward research. Caregiver burden had no association with willingness to participate. The strongest predictor of willingness was research attitudes.

A review of ethical issues in dementia

Dementia raises many ethical issues. The present review, taking note of the fact that the stages of dementia raise distinct ethical issues, focuses on three issues associated with stages of dementia's progression: (1) how the emergence of preclinical and asymptomatic but at-risk categories for dementia creates complex questions about preventive measures, risk disclosure, and protection from stigma and discrimination; (2) how despite efforts at dementia prevention, important research continues to investigate ways to alleviate clinical dementia's symptoms, and requires additional human subjects protections to ethically enroll persons with dementia; and (3) how in spite of research and prevention efforts, persons continue to need to live with dementia. This review highlights two major themes. First is how expanding the boundaries of dementias such as Alzheimer's to include asymptomatic but at-risk persons generate new ethical questions. One promising way to address these questions is to take an integrated approach to dementia ethics, which can include incorporating ethics-related data collection into the design of a dementia research study itself. Second is the interdisciplinary nature of ethical questions related to dementia, from health policy questions about insurance coverage for long-term care to political questions about voting, driving, and other civic rights and privileges to economic questions about balancing an employer's right to a safe and productive workforce with an employee's rights to avoid discrimination on the basis of their dementia risk. The review highlights these themes and emerging ethical issues in dementia.

Group music interventions for dementia-associated anxiety: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review examines the few published studies using group music interventions to reduce dementia-associated anxiety, the delivery of such interventions, and proposes changes to nursing curriculum for the future.

DESIGN

Literature review.

METHODS

All quantitative studies from 1989 to 2014 were searched in CINAHL and PubMed databases. Only published articles written in English were included. Studies excluded were reviews, non-human subjects, reports, expert opinions, subject age less than 65, papers that were theoretical or philosophical in nature, individual music interventions, case studies, studies without quantification of changes to anxiety, and those consisting of less than three subjects. Components of each study are analyzed and compared to examine the risk for bias.

RESULTS

Eight articles met the inclusion criteria for review. Subject dementia severity ranged from mild to severe among studies reviewed. Intervention delivery and group sizes varied among studies. Seven reported decreases to anxiety after a group music intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Group music interventions to treat dementia-associated anxiety is a promising treatment. However, the small number of studies and the large variety in methods and definitions limit our ability to draw conclusions. It appears that group size, age of persons with dementia and standardization of the best times for treatment to effect anxiety decreases all deserve further investigation. In addition, few studies have been conducted in the United States. In sum, while credit is due to the nurses and music therapists who pioneered the idea in nursing care, consideration of patient safety and improvements in music intervention delivery training from a healthcare perspective are needed. Finally, more research investigating resident safety and the growth of nursing roles within various types of facilities where anxiety is highest, is necessary.

Research involving subjects with Alzheimer's disease in Italy: the possible role of family members

BACKGROUND

Alzheimer's disease is a very common, progressive and still incurable disease. Future possibilities for its cure lie in the promotion of research that will increase our knowledge of the disorder's causes and lead to the discovery of effective remedies. Such research will necessarily involve individuals suffering from Alzheimer's disease. This raises the controversial issue of whether patients with Alzheimer's disease are competent to give their consent for research participation.

DISCUSSION

We discuss the case of subjects with Alzheimer's disease who may have impaired decision-making capacity and who could be involved in research protocols, taking into consideration aspects of the Italian normative framework, which requires a court-appointed legal representative for patients who are not able to give consent and does not recognise the legal value of advance directives. We show that this normative framework risks preventing individuals with Alzheimer's disease from taking part in research and that a new policy that favours research while promoting respect for patients' well-being and rights needs to be implemented.

SUMMARY

We believe that concerns about the difficulty of obtaining fully valid consent of patients with Alzheimer's disease should not prevent them from participating in clinical trials and benefiting from scientific progress. Therefore, we argue that the requirement for patients to have a legal representative may not be the best solution in all countries and clinical situations, and suggest promoting the role of patients' family members in the decision-making process. In addition, we outline the possible role of advance directives and ethics committees.

Time to reinvent the science of dementia: the need for care and social integration

OBJECTIVES

The increasing number of older adults with dementia is a large and growing public health problem. Alzheimer's disease, the prevailing form of dementia, is projected to quadruple worldwide. To date, the care and social integration of individuals with dementia is complicated by limited collaborations between biomedicine and other disciplines. The objective of this paper is therefore to reflect on the orientation of biomedicine with regard to the science of dementia, and to articulate a path for moving forward.

METHODS

The authors drew upon, and expanded, the insights of an interdisciplinary, international workshop entitled 'Bioethics and the Science of Aging: The Case of Dementia' held in October 2012 at the University of California in Berkeley.

RESULTS

The care of individuals with dementia compels solid interdisciplinary collaborations. There are several issues affecting the care of individuals with dementia: (1) an evolving definition of dementia; (2) the ambiguous benefits of the diagnosis of dementia; (3) ethical conflicts concerning consent processes and clinical trials; and (4) a limited understanding of the perspective of the person with dementia.

CONCLUSION

We argue that it is time for a renewed dialogue between biomedicine and other disciplines -- particularly public health, the social sciences, the medical humanities and bioethics. This interdisciplinary dialogue would facilitate a process of self-reflection within biomedicine. This dialogue will also provide the foundation for equitable public health interventions and will further prioritize the values and preferences of individuals with dementia, as well as their care and social integration.

Public's approach to surrogate consent for dementia research: cautious pragmatism

OBJECTIVES

To describe how members of the older general public deliberate with one another in finding solutions to the dilemma of involving persons with decisional incapacity in dementia research.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

One hundred sixty persons age 50 years and older who participated in an all-day deliberative democracy session on the ethics of surrogate consent for dementia research. The deliberative democracy day consisted of both extensive, interactive education with experts in clinical research and ethics, as well as small group deliberations.

MEASUREMENTS

Audiotaped small group deliberations were transcribed and analyzed and the main thematic elements were coded.

RESULTS

During deliberation, participants acknowledged the limitations of advanced research directives and discussed ways to improve their use. Although there was consensus about the necessity of surrogate consent, the participants recognized potential pitfalls and looked for ways to safeguard the process. Participants supporting surrogate consent for research emphasized societal and individual benefits, the importance of assent, and trust in surrogates and the oversight system. Other participants felt that the high risk of some research scenarios was not sufficiently offset by benefits to patients or society.

CONCLUSIONS

Members of the older general public are able to make use of in-depth education and peer deliberation to provide reasoned and informed opinions on the ethical use of surrogate consent for dementia research. The public's approach to surrogate consent is one of cautious pragmatism: an overall trust in science and future surrogates with awareness of the potential pitfalls, suggesting that their trust cannot be taken for granted.

How important is 'accuracy' of surrogate decision-making for research participation?

BACKGROUND

There is a longstanding concern about the accuracy of surrogate consent in representing the health care and research preferences of those who lose their ability to decide for themselves. We sought informed, deliberative views of the older general public (≥50 years old) regarding their willingness to participate in dementia research and to grant leeway to future surrogates to choose an option contrary to their stated wishes.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

503 persons aged 50+ recruited by random digit dialing were randomly assigned to one of three groups: deliberation, education, or control. The deliberation group attended an all-day education/peer deliberation session; the education group received written information only. Participants were surveyed at baseline, after the deliberation session (or equivalent time), and one month after the session, regarding their willingness to participate in dementia research and to give leeway to surrogates, regarding studies of varying risk-benefit profiles (a lumbar puncture study, a drug randomized controlled trial, a vaccine randomized controlled trial, and an early phase gene transfer trial). At baseline, 48% (gene transfer scenario) to 92% (drug RCT) were willing to participate in future dementia research. A majority of respondents (57-71% depending on scenario) were willing to give leeway to future surrogate decision-makers. Democratic deliberation increased willingness to participate in all scenarios, to grant leeway in 3 of 4 scenarios (lumbar puncture, vaccine, and gene transfer), and to enroll loved ones in research in all scenarios. On average, respondents were more willing to volunteer themselves for research than to enroll their loved ones.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Most people were willing to grant leeway to their surrogates, and this willingness was either sustained or increased after democratic deliberation, suggesting that the attitude toward leeway is a reliable opinion. Eliciting a person's current preferences about future research participation should also involve eliciting his or her leeway preferences.

Methodological challenges in physical activity research with older adults

The aging adult population is growing, as well as the incidence of chronic illness among older adults. Physical activity (PA) has been demonstrated in the literature to be a beneficial component of self-management for chronic illnesses commonly found in the older adult population. Health sciences research seeks to develop new knowledge, practices, and policies that may benefit older adults' management of chronic illness and quality of life. However, research with the older adult population, though beneficial, includes potential methodological challenges specific to this age group. This article discusses common methodological issues in research among older adults, with a focus on PA intervention studies. Awareness and understanding of these issues may facilitate future development of research studies devoted to the aging adult population, through appropriate modification and tailoring of sampling techniques, intervention development, and data measures and collection.

Surrogate decision making for patients with end-stage dementia

OBJECTIVE

We aim to explore how health surrogates of patients with dementia proceed in decision making, which considerations are decisive, and whether family surrogates and professional guardians decide differently.

METHODS

We conducted an experimental vignette study using think aloud protocol analysis. Thirty-two family surrogates and professional guardians were asked to decide on two hypothetical case vignettes, concerning a feeding tube placement and a cardiac pacemaker implantation in patients with end-stage dementia. They had to verbalize their thoughts while deciding. Verbalizations were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed according to content analysis. By experimentally changing variables in the vignettes, the impact of these variables on the outcome of decision making was calculated.

RESULTS

Although only 25% and 31% of the relatives gave their consent to the feeding tube and pacemaker placement, respectively, 56% and 81% of the professional guardians consented to these life-sustaining measures. Relatives decided intuitively, referred to their own preferences, and focused on the patient's age, state of wellbeing, and suffering. Professional guardians showed a deliberative approach, relied on medical and legal authorities, and emphasized patient autonomy. Situational variables such as the patient's current behavior and the views of health care professionals and family members had higher impacts on decisions than the patient's prior statements or life attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the process and outcome of surrogate decision making depend heavily on whether the surrogate is a relative or not. These findings have implications for the physician-surrogate relationship and legal frameworks regarding surrogacy.

Temporal stability of receptiveness to clinical research on Alzheimer disease

Research advance directives are a proposed mechanism for ensuring that decisions with regard to research participation adhere to preferences voiced by persons with Alzheimer disease (AD) before losing decisional capacity. Although this approach rests on the assumption that preferences with regard to research participation are consistent over time, little is known about the stability of such preferences. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the temporal stability of older adults' receptiveness to participation in clinical trials, neuroimaging studies, and psychosocial investigations on AD. One hundred and four participants in the University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer Disease Research Center were annually surveyed with regard to their willingness to be contacted with regard to clinical drug trials, neuroimaging studies, and psychosocial research for which they might be eligible. Receptiveness to contact with regard to AD research was compared at 2 time points, 1 year apart. At baseline, most respondents were willing to be contacted with regard to their eligibility for drug trials, imaging studies, and psychosocial research. Thirty-seven percent of respondents voiced a different set of preferences at year 2 as compared with year 1. Differences included both increased and decreased willingness to be contacted. Neither stability of preferences nor direction of change (more vs. less willing) varied by diagnostic group. Bivariate analyses revealed that participation in at least 1 ancillary research study was associated with an overall increase in willingness to be contacted. We conclude that a significant proportion of research-friendly individuals voice different sets of preferences with regard to the possibility of research participation when queried at different points in time. Amenability to participating in clinical research on AD is a relatively dynamic personal attribute that may be influenced by personal experience with research participation. This finding has relevance for the policy debate around research advance directives, an approach which assumes that preferences with regard to research participation are consistent over time.

Using data to improve surrogate consent for clinical research with incapacitated adults

Current practice relies on surrogates to enroll incapacitated adults in research. Yet, it is unclear to what extent this practice protects adults who have lost the ability to consent for themselves. To address this question, we conducted two literature searches to identify articles which report empirical data on three issues central to protecting adults who have lost the ability to consent: (1) adults' willingness to participate in research should they lose the ability to consent; (2) adults' willingness to allow a surrogate to make research decisions for them; and (3) the extent to which surrogates' enrollment decisions are consistent with their charges' preferences and values. These searches identified 21 articles, representing 20 distinct datasets. The data indicate that many adults are willing to participate in research should they lose the ability to consent, and many are willing to allow their family members to make research decisions for them if they become incapacitated. The data also raise concern that surrogates may be making research enrollment decisions that, in some cases, are inconsistent with their charges' preferences and values. These findings suggest that modifications to current practice should be considered to better protect adults who have lost the ability to consent. One option would be to require, in addition to surrogate permission and subject assent, sufficient evidence that enrollment is consistent with the individual's preferences and values.

Promoting advance planning for health care and research among older adults: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Family members are often required to act as substitute decision-makers when health care or research participation decisions must be made for an incapacitated relative. Yet most families are unable to accurately predict older adult preferences regarding future health care and willingness to engage in research studies. Discussion and documentation of preferences could improve proxies' abilities to decide for their loved ones. This trial assesses the efficacy of an advance planning intervention in improving the accuracy of substitute decision-making and increasing the frequency of documented preferences for health care and research. It also investigates the financial impact on the healthcare system of improving substitute decision-making.

Methods/Design

Dyads (n = 240) comprising an older adult and his/her self-selected proxy are randomly allocated to the experimental or control group, after stratification for type of designated proxy and self-report of prior documentation of healthcare preferences. At baseline, clinical and research vignettes are used to elicit older adult preferences and assess the ability of their proxy to predict those preferences. Responses are elicited under four health states, ranging from the subject's current health state to severe dementia. For each state, we estimated the public costs of the healthcare services that would typically be provided to a patient under these scenarios. Experimental dyads are visited at home, twice, by a specially trained facilitator who communicates the dyad-specific results of the concordance assessment, helps older adults convey their wishes to their proxies, and offers assistance in completing a guide entitled My Preferences that we designed specifically for that purpose. In between these meetings, experimental dyads attend a group information session about My Preferences. Control dyads attend three monthly workshops aimed at promoting healthy behaviors. Concordance assessments are repeated at the end of the intervention and 6 months later to assess improvement in predictive accuracy and cost savings, if any. Copies of completed guides are made at the time of these assessments.

Discussion

This study will determine whether the tested intervention guides proxies in making decisions that concur with those of older adults, motivates the latter to record their wishes in writing, and yields savings for the healthcare system.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN89993391

Comfort with proxy consent to research involving decisionally impaired older adults: do type of proxy and risk-benefit profile matter?

BACKGROUND

Dementia research often requires the participation of people with dementia. Obtaining informed consent is problematic when potential participants lack the capacity to provide it. We investigated comfort with proxy consent to research involving older adults deemed incapable of this decision, and examined if comfort varies with the type of proxy and the study's risk-benefit profile.

METHODS

We surveyed random samples of five relevant groups (older adults, informal caregivers, physicians, researchers in aging, and Research Ethics Board members) from four Canadian provinces. Respondents were presented with scenarios involving four types of proxies (non-assigned, designated in a healthcare advance directive with or without instructions specific to research participation, and court-appointed). Given a series of risk-benefit profiles, respondents indicated whether they were comfortable with proxy consent to research for each scenario.

RESULTS

Two percent of the respondents felt proxy consent should never be allowed. In all groups, comfort depended far more on the risk-benefit profile associated with the research scenario than with type of proxy. For research involving little or no risk and potential personal benefits, over 90% of the respondents felt comfortable with substitute consent by a designated or court-appointed proxy while 80% were at ease with a non-assigned proxy. For studies involving serious risks with potentially greater personal benefits, older adults and informal caregivers were less comfortable with proxy consent.

CONCLUSIONS

A large majority of Canadians are comfortable with proxy consent for low-risk research. Further work is needed to establish what kinds of research are considered to be low risk.

Effect of public deliberation on attitudes toward surrogate consent for dementia research

OBJECTIVE

To assess the informed, deliberative views of the older general public toward a policy of allowing surrogate consent for Alzheimer disease (AD) research.

METHODS

A total of 503 persons aged 50+ recruited by random digit dialing were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: deliberation, education, or control. The deliberation group attended an all-day education/peer deliberation session; the education group received written information only. Participants were surveyed at baseline, after deliberation session (or equivalent time), and 1 month after the session, regarding their attitudes toward a policy of allowing surrogate consent for research studies of varying risks and potential benefits (a lumbar puncture study, a drug randomized controlled trial, a vaccine randomized controlled trial, and an early phase gene transfer trial).

RESULTS

At baseline, a policy of surrogate consent for AD research was supported by 55%-91%, depending on the scenario. The education group had a transient increase in support for one research scenario after receiving the information materials. In the deliberation group, support for surrogate consent was higher after deliberation for all scenarios (67% to 97%), with much of the increase sustained 1 month after the deliberation session. No changes occurred in the control group. The study's limitations include self-selection of participants due to the demanding nature of attendance at the deliberation sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

This sample of the older general public generally supported a policy of surrogate consent for AD research at baseline. Their support increased with democratic deliberation involving informed, in-depth exploration of the relevant scientific and ethical issues.

The ethics of informed consent in Alzheimer disease research

Clinical research on Alzheimer disease (AD) is much needed but requires the participation of patients with substantial cognitive impairment who have difficulty providing informed consent. Despite decades of debate, policies regulating such research are not well-defined. Although numerous studies have underscored the difficulties of obtaining informed consent for clinical research from patients compromised by AD, there is also increasing evidence that such individuals and their surrogates can make decisions about research participation that are consistent with the patients' values. Policy discussions and future research should consider how the ethical reservations about enrolling incapacitated patients in research could be mitigated by developing ways to promote the congruence between surrogates' decisions and patients' values.

Preservation of the capacity to appoint a proxy decision maker: implications for dementia research

CONTEXT

Research involving persons with impaired decision-making capacity (such as persons with Alzheimer disease [AD]) remains ethically challenging, especially when the research involves significant risk. If individuals incapable of consenting to research studies were able to appoint a research proxy, it would allow for an appointed surrogate (rather than a de facto surrogate) to represent the subject.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent to which persons with AD retain their capacity to appoint a research proxy.

DESIGN

Interview study.

SETTING

Academic research.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred eighty-eight persons with AD were interviewed for their capacity to appoint a proxy for research and to provide consent to 2 hypothetical research scenarios, a lower-risk randomized clinical trial testing a new drug (drug RCT) and a higher-risk randomized clinical trial testing neurosurgical cell implants using a sham control condition (neurosurgical RCT). Categorical capacity status for each subject was determined by independent videotaped reviews of capacity interviews by 5 experienced psychiatrists.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Categorical capacity determinations for the capacity to appoint a research proxy, capacity to consent to a drug RCT, and capacity to consent to a neurosurgical RCT.

RESULTS

Data showed that 37.7% (40 of 106) of those deemed incapable of consenting to the drug RCT and 54.8% (86 of 157) of those deemed incapable of consenting to the neurosurgical RCT were found capable of appointing a research proxy. Only 7 of 186 (3.8%) were deemed capable of consenting to the neurosurgical RCT by all 5 psychiatrists.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of persons with AD who were thought incapable of consenting to lower-risk or higher-risk studies have preserved capacity for appointing a research proxy. Because few persons are found to be unequivocally capable of providing independent consent to higher-risk AD research, providing for an appointed surrogate even after the onset of AD, which might best be done in the early stages of the illness, may help address key ethical challenges to AD research.

Ethics in Psychiatric Research: A Review of 25 Years of NIH-funded Empirical Research Projects

BACKGROUND: This paper reviews the past 25 years of empirical research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on matters of ethics in psychiatric research. METHODS: Using the NIH RePORTER and Medline databases, we identified 43 grants and 77 publications that involved the empirical study of a matter of ethics in research involving mental health service users. RESULTS: These articles provide original and useful information on important topics, most especially the capacity to consent and the voluntariness of consent. For example, participants who share a diagnosis vary widely in levels of cognitive impairment that correlate with decisional capacity, and capacity to consent can be enhanced easily using iterative consent processes. Few articles address matters of justice or benefits in research, particularly from the perspectives of participants. No articles address matters of privacy, confidentiality, or researcher professionalism. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the usefulness of data from the studies conducted to date, current research on research ethics in psychiatry does not adequately address the concerns of service users as expressed in recent publications.

Depression and QOL in patients with ALS: how do self-ratings and ratings by relatives differ?

BACKGROUND

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a lethal neurodegenerative disease affecting the motor nervous system and currently lacking effective means of treatment. The focus of ALS treatment therefore lies in palliative treatment from a multidisciplinary team. Published findings regarding affective components and patients' perceived quality-of-life (QoL) as well as comparative reports of family members/caregivers remain equivocal.

METHODS

In this study, 41 ALS patients and their relatives were enrolled in a study employing the 12-item ALS-Depression-Inventory (ADI-12) and the Munich quality-of-life dimensions list (MLDL). The ALS-functional rating scale (ALSFRS-R) was used to evaluate physical disabilities.

RESULTS

The ADI-12 depression scale data identified nine patients with depressive disorders; the patients had satisfactory QoL outcomes on the MLDL. The results did not differ significantly between ALS patients and their relatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, in agreement with other studies, QoL and emerging depression do not automatically coincide with patients' physical impairments of the patients. This "well-being paradox" is currently not well understood, and further studies are needed to optimize the treatment of patients through the course of disease progression.

Surrogate consent for research involving adults with impaired decision making: survey of Institutional Review Board practices

OBJECTIVES

Most critically ill adults have impaired decision-making capacity and are unable to consent to research. Yet, little is known about how Institutional Review Boards interpret the Common Rule's call for safeguards in research involving incapacitated adults. We aimed to examine Institutional Review Board practices on surrogate consent and other safeguards to protect incapacitated adults in research.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional survey of 104 Institutional Review Boards from a random sample of U.S. institutions engaged in adult human subject research (response rate, 68%) in 2007 and 2008.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

Institutional Review Board acceptance of surrogate consent, research risks, and other safeguards in research involving incapacitated adults.

MAIN RESULTS

Institutional Review Boards reported that, in the previous year, they sometimes (49%), frequently (33%), or very frequently (2%) reviewed studies involving patients in the intensive care unit. Six Institutional Review Boards (6%) do not accept surrogate consent for research from any persons, and 22% of Institutional Review Boards accept only an authorized proxy, spouse, or parent as surrogates, excluding adult children and other family. Institutional Review Boards vary in their limits on research risks in studies involving incapacitated adults: 15% disallow any research regardless of risk in studies without direct benefit, whereas 39% allow only minimal risks. When there was potential benefit, fewer Institutional Review Boards limit the risk at minimal (11%; p < .001). Even in populations at high risk for impaired decision making, many Institutional Review Boards rarely or never required procedures to determine capacity (13%-21%). Institutional Review Boards also varied in their use of independent monitors, research proxies, and advanced research directives.

CONCLUSIONS

Much variability exists in Institutional Review Board surrogate consent practices and limits on risks in studies involving incapacitated adults. This variability may have adverse consequences for needed research involving incapacitated adults. Clarification of current regulations is needed to provide guidance.

Consent in impaired populations

Impairments in patients with dementia and other disorders affecting cognition may have a negative impact on their capacity to provide consent to treatment or to participation in research. A growing literature confirms that even patients with mild cognitive impairment may experience decrements in decisional abilities, findings that are more pronounced still in the early stages of dementia. However, most patients with mild dementia probably remain competent to provide a valid consent to treatment or research, and even some patients with moderate dementia may retain capacity in particular circumstances. Clinical evaluation of decisional competence has been augmented by structured approaches, including reliable instruments that may be used in the clinical setting. To avoid needlessly depriving patients of their right to make health care decisions, evaluations should be designed to maximize patient performance. However, when substitute consent is necessary, state laws generally provide a range of options, including advance directives and familial consent.

Deliberative assessment of surrogate consent in dementia research

BACKGROUND

Research involving incapacitated persons with dementia entails complex scientific, legal, and ethical issues, making traditional surveys of layperson views on the ethics of such research challenging. We therefore assessed the impact of democratic deliberation (DD), involving balanced, detailed education and peer deliberation, on the views of those responsible for persons with dementia.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-eight community-recruited caregivers or primary decision-makers for persons with dementia were randomly assigned to either an all-day DD session group or a control group. Educational materials used for the DD session were vetted for balance and accuracy by an interdisciplinary advisory panel. We assessed the acceptability of family-surrogate consent for dementia research ("surrogate-based research") from a societal policy perspective as well as from the more personal perspectives of deciding for a loved one or for oneself (surrogate and self-perspectives), assessed at baseline, immediately post-DD session, and 1 month after DD date, for four research scenarios of varying risk-benefit profiles.

RESULTS

At baseline, a majority in both the DD and control groups supported a policy of family consent for dementia research in all research scenarios. The support for a policy of family consent for surrogate-based research increased in the DD group, but not in the control group. The change in the DD group was maintained 1 month later. In the DD group, there were transient changes in attitudes from surrogate or self-perspectives. In the control group, there were no changes from baseline in attitude toward surrogate consent from any perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive, balanced, and accurate education, along with peer deliberation provided by democratic deliberation, led to a sustained increase in support for a societal policy of family consent in dementia research among those responsible for dementia patients.

How are the interests of incapacitated research participants protected through legislation? An Italian study on legal agency for dementia patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with dementia may have limited capacity to give informed consent to participate in clinical research. One possible way to safeguard the patients' interests in research is the involvement of a proxy in the recruitment process. In Italy, the system of proxy is determined by the courts. In this study we evaluate the timing for appointment of a legal proxy in Italy and identify predictive variables of appointment.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Subjects were recruited among the outpatients seeking medical advice for cognitive complaints at the Centre for Research and Treatment of Cognitive Dysfunctions, University of Milan, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital. The Centre was participating to the AdCare Study, a no-profit randomised clinical trial coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health. The requirement that informed consent be given by a legal representative dramatically slowed down the recruitment process in AdCare, which was prematurely interrupted. The Centre for Research and Treatment of Cognitive Dysfunctions collected data on the timing required to appoint the legal representatives. Patients diagnosed with dementia and their caregivers were provided information on the Italian law on legal agency (law 6/2004). At each scheduled check-up the caregiver was asked whether she/he had applied to appoint a legal proxy for the patient and the time interval between the presentation of the law, the registration of the application at the law court chancellery and the sentence of appointment was registered. The study involved 169 demented patients. Seventy-eight patients (46.2%) applied to appoint a legal proxy. These subjects were usually younger, had been suffering from dementia for a longer time, had less than two children and made more use of memantine. The mean interval time between the presentation of the law and the patients' application to the law court chancellery was two months. The mean interval time between the patient's application to the law court chancellery and the sentence of appointment was four months.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

In Italy the requirement that legal representatives be appointed by the courts slows down subjects' participation in research. Other procedures for legal agency of the incapacitated patients may be adopted, taking as examples other EU countries' systems.

Assessment of the capacity to express informed consent for organ donation in patients with schizophrenia

In Italy, the "silent-consent" principle of donor's willingness regulates organ donation for postmortem transplantation, but civil incompetence excludes it. We investigated decisional capacity for organ donation for transplantation of 30 controls and 30 nonincompetent patients with schizophrenia as related to clinical symptoms, cognition, and functioning. Assessments were carried out through the Competence for Donation Assessment Scale (CDAS), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, Life Skills Profile (LSP), Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices (RCPM), Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Rey RI, Rey RD, and Visual Search. Patients and controls differed on the CDAS Understanding and Choice Expression areas. Patients showed significant inverse bivariate correlations between CDAS Understanding and scores on total BPRS, LSP self-care scale, and RCPM cognitive test. Our results show that decisional capacity for participating in research does not predict decisional capacity for postmortem organ donation in patients with schizophrenic or schizoaffective psychosis; hence, before judging consent for donation, patients must be provided with enhanced information to better understand this delicate issue.

Assessing the public's views in research ethics controversies: deliberative democracy and bioethics as natural allies

In a liberal democracy, policy decisions regarding ethical controversies, including those in research ethics, should incorporate the opinions of its citizens. Eliciting informed and well-considered ethical opinions can be challenging. The issues may not be widely familiar and they may involve complex scientific, legal, historical, and ethical dimensions. Traditional surveys risk eliciting superficial and uninformed opinions that may be of dubious quality for policy formation. We argue that the theory and practice of deliberative democracy (DD) is especially useful in overcoming such inadequacies. We explain DD theory and practice, discuss the rationale for using DD methods in research ethics, and illustrate in depth the use of a DD method for a longstanding research ethics controversy involving research based on surrogate consent. The potential pitfalls of DD and the means of minimizing them as well as future research directions are also discussed.