How proxies make decisions about research for patients with Alzheimer's disease

'It's not making a decision, it's prompting the discussions': a qualitative study exploring stakeholders' views on the acceptability and feasibility of advance research planning (CONSULT-ADVANCE)

BACKGROUND

Health and care research involving people who lack capacity to consent requires an alternative decision maker to decide whether they participate or not based on their 'presumed will'. However, this is often unknown. Advance research planning (ARP) is a process for people who anticipate periods of impaired capacity to prospectively express their preferences about research participation and identify who they wish to be involved in future decisions. This may help to extend individuals' autonomy by ensuring that proxy decisions are based on their actual wishes. This qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholders' views about the acceptability and feasibility of ARP and identify barriers and facilitators to its implementation in the UK.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 27 researchers, practitioners, and members of the public who had participated in a preceding survey. Interviews were conducted remotely between April and November 2023. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants were supportive of the concept of ARP, with differing amounts of support for the range of possible ARP activities depending on the context. Six main themes were identified: (1) Planting a seed - creating opportunities to initiate/engage with ARP; (2) A missing part of the puzzle - how preferences expressed through ARP could help inform decisions; (3) Finding the sweet spot - optimising the timing of ARP; (4) More than a piece of paper - finding the best mode for recording preferences; (5) Keeping the door open to future opportunities - minimising the risk of unintended consequences; and (6) Navigating with a compass - principles underpinning ARP to ensure safeguarding and help address inequalities. Participants also identified a number of implementation challenges, and proposed facilitative strategies that might overcome them which included embedding advance research planning in existing future planning processes and research-focused activities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a routemap to implementing ARP in the UK to enable people anticipating impaired capacity to express their preferences about research, thus ensuring greater opportunities for inclusion of this under-served group, and addressing the decisional burden experienced by some family members acting as proxies. Development of interventions and guidance to support ARP is needed, with a focus on ensuring accessibility.

Proxy Decision-Making for Clinical Research in Nursing Home Residents With Dementia: A Qualitative Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The benefit-risk ratio of many interventions remains unclear in older adults with dementia. Efforts for more representative trial inclusion are made; however, recruiting and particularly gaining informed consent remains complex. For research participation, dementia compels the designation of a legal guardian (LG) to give proxy consent. To advance future trial development, we aimed to provide more insights into the factors that affect the proxy decision-making process in dementia research.

DESIGN

A qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews about proxy decision-making on participation in dementia research.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

LGs of nursing home residents that gave (n = 19) and refrained from giving (n = 18) proxy consent for a clinical trial (the ∗∗∗BLINDED∗∗∗ study) in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Verbatim transcripts were thematically analyzed by using a preliminary deductive framework with room for induction of additional emerging themes, being an overall abductive approach. Based on that theme list, related factors of the decision-making process were grouped into overarching levels and merged into a step-by-step process.

RESULTS

When discussing proxy decision-making on the participation of an older adult with dementia in a clinical trial, LGs described interconnected factors on the level of the study and patient. Past experiences and attitudes of the LG influenced the weighing of these study- and patient-related factors, leading to a preliminary decision. Other proxies and treating health care professionals (HCPs) were named as important other stakeholders of the decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

When giving proxy consent for research participation, LGs weigh study- and patient-related factors, leading to an initial benefit-risk evaluation. This weighing process is influenced by LG-related factors and can be modulated by other proxies or treating HCPs, leading to a definitive decision. Although insights into these underlying mechanisms could facilitate the proxy decision-making process for both LGs and researchers, treating HCPs could act as an independent party.

Feasibility, effectiveness and costs of a decision support intervention for consultees and legal representatives of adults lacking capacity to consent (CONSULT): protocol for a randomised Study Within a Trial

BACKGROUND

Randomised trials play a vital role in underpinning evidence-based care. However, trials involving adults with impaired capacity to consent raise a number of ethical and methodological challenges, leading to the frequent exclusion of this group from trials. This includes challenges around involving family members as alternative 'proxy' decision-makers. Family members are often given little information about their role as a consultee or legal representative. Some family members find making a decision about trial participation difficult and may experience an emotional and decisional burden as a result. Families have reported a need for greater support and guidance when making such decisions, leading to the development of a decision aid ('Making decisions about research for others') for family members acting as consultee/legal representative. The decision aid now requires evaluation to determine its effectiveness in supporting families to make more informed decisions.

METHODS

This protocol describes a prospective, multi-centre, randomised-controlled Study Within a Trial (SWAT) to evaluate the effectiveness of the decision aid. The SWAT will initially be embedded in approximately five host trials. SWAT participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention (decision aid alongside standard information about the host trial provided to consultees/legal representatives) or control (standard information alone). The primary outcome is the quality of proxy consent decision, assessed by the Combined Scale for Proxy Informed Consent Decisions (CONCORD). The SWAT design is informed by previous qualitative research. Initial feasibility will be explored in one host trial, followed by the main SWAT. An embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation will enable the SWAT findings to be contextualised and identify factors likely to affect implementation.

DISCUSSION

This SWAT will generate the first evidence for recruitment interventions for trials involving adults lacking capacity to consent and add to knowledge about the use of decision support interventions in trial participation decisions. The SWAT will be embedded in a range of trials, and the heterogenous nature of the host trials, settings and populations involved will enable the intervention to be evaluated in a wide range of contexts. However, a pragmatic and flexible approach to conducting the SWAT is needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The SWAT is registered as SWAT #159 with the Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT repository (registered 09.08.2020). Each host trial will be registered on a clinical trials registry.

Development of a measure to assess the quality of proxy decisions about research participation on behalf of adults lacking capacity to consent: the Combined Scale for Proxy Informed Consent Decisions (CONCORD scale)

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of adults lacking the capacity to consent to trials requires the involvement of an alternative 'proxy' decision-maker, usually a family member. This can be challenging for family members, with some experiencing emotional and decisional burdens. Interventions to support proxy consent decisions in non-emergency settings are being developed. However, the ability to evaluate interventions is limited due to a lack of measures that capture outcomes of known importance, as identified through a core outcome set (COS).

METHODS

Using established measure development principles, a four-stage process was used to develop and refine items for a new measure of proxy decision quality: (1) findings from a recent scoping review and consensus study were reviewed to identify items for inclusion in the scale and any existing outcome measures, (2) assessment of content coverage by existing measures and identification of insufficiency, (3) construction of a novel scale, and (4) cognitive testing to explore comprehension of the scale and test its content adequacy through interviews with family members of people with impaired capacity.

RESULTS

A range of outcome measures associated with healthcare decision-making and informed consent decisions, such as the Decisional Conflict Scale, were identified in the scoping review. These measures were mapped against the key constructs identified in the COS to assess content coverage. Insufficient coverage of areas such as proxy-specific satisfaction and knowledge sufficiency by existing instruments indicated that a novel measure was needed. An initial version of a combined measure (the CONCORD scale) was drafted and tested during cognitive interviews with eleven family members. The interviews established comprehension, acceptability, feasibility, and content adequacy of the scale. Participants suggested re-phrasing and re-ordering some questions, leading to the creation of a revised version.

CONCLUSIONS

The CONCORD scale provides a brief measure to evaluate the quality of decisions made on behalf of an adult who lacks the capacity to consent in non-emergency settings, enabling the evaluation of interventions to improve proxy decision quality. Initial evaluation indicates it has content adequacy and is feasible to use. Further statistical validation work is being undertaken.

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

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Scoping review of the 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 4,171 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 = 7,331) were older persons (71%), caregivers of older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (23%), and older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (6%). Synthesis identified 2 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.

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.

Development of a decision support intervention for family members of adults who lack capacity to consent to trials

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is required for participation in clinical trials, however trials involving adults who lack capacity to consent require different enrolment processes. A family member usually acts as a proxy to make a decision based on the patient's 'presumed will', but these decisions can be challenging and families may experience an emotional and decisional burden. Decisions made on behalf of others are conceptually different from those made for ourselves. Innovations have been developed to improve informed consent processes for research, including a number of decision aids, however there are no interventions for proxies who are faced with more complex decisions. This article outlines the development of a novel decision aid to support families making decisions about research participation on behalf of an adult who lacks capacity to consent.

METHODS

Decision support interventions should be developed using rigorous and evidence-based methods. This intervention was developed using MRC guidance for the development of complex interventions, and a conceptual framework for the development and evaluation of decision aids for people considering taking part in a clinical trial. The intervention was informed by a systematic review and analysis of existing information provision. Previous qualitative research with families who acted as proxies enabled the development of a theoretical framework to underpin the intervention. The intervention was iteratively developed with the involvement of lay advisors and relevant stakeholders.

RESULTS

Previous research, theoretical frameworks, and decision aid development frameworks were used to identify and develop the intervention components. The decision aid includes information about the proxy's role and utilises a values clarification exercise and decision support methods to enable a more informed and better-quality decision. Stakeholders, including those representing implementers and receivers of the intervention, contributed to the design and comprehensibility of the decision aid to ensure that it would be acceptable for use.

CONCLUSIONS

Frameworks for the development of decision aids for people considering participating in a clinical trial can be used to develop interventions for family members acting as proxy decision-makers. The decision support tool is acceptable to users. Feasibility testing and outcome measure development is required prior to any evaluation of its effectiveness.

Ethical and Methodological Considerations for Evaluating Participant Views on Alzheimer's and Dementia Research

The urgent need to expand enrollment in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) research has synergized calls for an empiric science of research recruitment, yet, progress in this area is hindered by challenges to measuring views toward ADRD research. This paper reports ethical and methodological considerations identified through a prospective qualitative study investigating ADRD patient and caregiver views on research recruitment and participation surrounding acute illness. Ethical and methodological considerations were identified through a combination of memoing, collaboration with a Community Advisory Board (CAB), and analysis of interview data from ADRD patients (N = 3) and/or caregivers (N = 28). These included risk for undue influence attributable to role ambiguity/motivational misconceptions, divergent decision-making preferences, bias contributing to low referrals of ADRD participants, and difficulty answering abstract/hypothetical questions. Many considerations were successfully addressed with multifaceted, proactive strategies, and CAB input. Findings have implications for recruitment science research and the validity of inferences regarding research preferences.

Advances and challenges in conducting ethical trials involving populations lacking capacity to consent: A decade in review

Informed consent is an essential requirement prior to clinical trial participation, however some 'vulnerable' groups, such as people with cognitive impairments and those in medical emergency situations, may lack decisional capacity to consent. This raises ethical and practical challenges when designing and conducting clinical trials involving these populations, who are frequently excluded as a result. Despite recent advances in improving informed consent processes, there has been far less attention paid to the enrolment of adults lacking capacity. Exclusion criteria are an important determinant of the external validity of clinical trial results. The exclusion of these populations, and consent-based recruitment biases which arise from the challenges of identifying and involving surrogate decision-makers, leads to trials which are not representative of the clinical population. This article discusses the involvement of adults who lack decisional capacity to consent in clinical trials and presents the advances over the previous decade and the remaining ethical challenges for the inclusion of this under-represented population in research.

Effects of Visual Aids for End-of-Life Care on Decisional Capacity of People With Dementia

Purpose This study evaluated the decision-making capacity of persons with mild and moderate dementia on end-of-life care when using visual aids. A secondary purpose was to learn whether the judges naive to the experimental conditions would rate participants' decisional abilities as better when augmented by visual aids, thereby validating the behavioral changes due to the use of these external support. Method Twenty older adults with mild and moderate dementia demonstrated Understanding, Expressing a Choice, Reasoning, and Appreciation of 2 medical vignettes under 2 counterbalanced conditions: verbal alone or verbal with visual aids. Transcripts were analyzed and scored to measure decisional skills. Twelve judges rated participants' decisional abilities using a 7-point Likert scale. Results Participants demonstrated significantly better overall decisional capacity in Understanding, Reasoning, and Appreciation when supported by visual aids during the decision-making process. No significant differences between conditions were found in Expressing a Choice, the decisional skill Logical Sequence under Reasoning, and Acknowledgment under Appreciation. Overall, the judges' ratings validated these outcomes; the judges' ratings reflected greater agreement in the visual condition than in the verbal condition. Conclusions Findings indicated that visual aids (a) improved the decision-making capacity of individuals with dementia in comprehending medical information, employing supportive reasons, and relating this information to his or her own situation and (b) contain the potential for judges who majored or are majoring in speech-language pathology to reach a stronger consensus when determining the decision-making capacity of individuals with dementia.

The U-ARE Protocol: A Pragmatic Approach to Decisional Capacity Assessment for Clinical Research

With increased longevity and growth in the number of older adults comes rising rates of individuals with cognitive impairment and dementia. The expansion of this population has important implications for research on aging and dementia syndromes, namely increased enrollment of older individuals in clinical research. Ethical prerogatives, as well as historical underrepresentation of persons with dementia in research studies due to the perceived burden of traditional decisional capacity evaluations, necessitates the development of pragmatic approaches to ascertain decisional abilities in research settings. We outline a protocol used in the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC) that adopts a stepped approach to the evaluation of decisional capacity meant to maximize study visit efficiency while preserving participant safety and autonomy. The protocol specifies the structure of the consent process and incorporates a brief semi-structured interview based on Appelbaum & Grisso's theoretical model for evaluating a patient's decisional capacity to provide informed consent to participate in research. This protocol is easily implemented in a research study visit and is designed to minimize participant burden and ensure reliable assessment of decisional capacity in older adults across a wide range of research protocols. The protocol emphasizes capacity optimization, using memory aids and other compensatory strategies to preserve participant autonomy while protecting welfare.

'It's a tough decision': a qualitative study of proxy decision-making for research involving adults who lack capacity to consent in UK

BACKGROUND

Research into dementia and other conditions connected with cognitive impairments is essential but conducting research with populations who lack capacity to provide consent involves a number of ethical, legal and practical challenges. In England and Wales, family members can act as a consultee or legal representative on behalf of someone who lacks capacity. However, there is a paucity of research about how family members make decisions concerning research participation.

OBJECTIVE

To explore family members' experiences of proxy decision-making for research. Understanding how proxy decisions are made could lead to interventions to support greater inclusion of individuals in research who have impaired decision-making capacity.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 17 family members who had experience as a proxy for making decisions about participation in research, including those who had agreed to participation and those who declined. Thematic analysis was used to examine experiences and generate findings for research practice and to develop future supportive interventions.

RESULTS

Proxy decision-making is highly contextualised. Proxies balance a number of factors when deciding about research participation, including the person's values and preferences, within the specific context of the study, and the practicalities of being involved. Proxies use these factors to construct a decision that is authentic to the person they care for.

CONCLUSIONS

Proxy decision-making for research is a complex process with inter-woven layers of decision-making. Decisions can be problematic for some proxies who may benefit from decision support to make an informed decision about research participation on behalf of a family member.

Involving people with dementia and their carers in dementia education for undergraduate healthcare professionals: a qualitative study of motivation to participate and experience

ABSTRACTBackground:There is a need to improve dementia education to prepare future generations of healthcare professionals to deal with the increasing challenges they will face. Time for Dementia is an innovative undergraduate education program for medical, nursing, and paramedic students in the south of England. Success of the program is dependent upon the participation of families (people with dementia and their carers). This qualitative study seeks to explore the motivation and experiences of the families taking part in the program.

METHODS

A topic guide was developed to understand factors influencing motivation and retention. A purposeful sample of participant families, who had at least 12 months of involvement in the program, were selected from a cohort of 282 families and were invited to take part in an in-depth qualitative interview. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. This was subsequently refined in an on-going process of analysis aided by the use of Nvivo 11. Interviewing stopped when thematic saturation was reached.

RESULTS

Eighteen families took part in an in-depth qualitative interviews. Four themes were identified from the analysis. These themes were motivators, value to family, value to the person with dementia, and student factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies underpinning factors that motivate families to join dementia education programs and the impact of such programs upon them. We found that engagement in such programs can have therapeutic benefits to participants, and do not cause harm. These findings can be used to strengthen recruitment and enhance family involvement in similar programs.

Looking ahead to a future with Alzheimer's disease: coping with the unknown

The conceptualisation of Alzheimer's disease as an illness with ‘no future’ exposes people with the condition to significant fear and stress. Therefore, exploring how people look ahead to the future in the face of Alzheimer's disease is of foremost importance. Semi-structured interviews (N = 14) explored the future outlook of people with early (N = 5) and late-onset (N = 7) Alzheimer's disease and those who support them (N = 14). Thematic analysis identified how participants managed their changing futures through focusing on positive information, and taking ‘one day at a time’. Younger and older people shared similar future outlook and subsequent coping strategies, as predicted by Carstensen's Socioemotional Selectivity Theory. Both people with Alzheimer's disease and those who support them avoided looking far ahead as a way of managing the uncertain future, and had little awareness of future planning in the context of current policies. Such avoidance suggests that policy which encourages future planning should consider its utility and explore ways of helping people to plan, whilst focusing on daily living.

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.

"The Church of Online Support": Examining the Use of Blogs Among Family Caregivers of Persons With Dementia

Many individuals, including dementia caregivers, use blogs to share their experiences. These blogs contain rich narratives representing an untapped resource for understanding the psychosocial impact of caring for a person with dementia at the family level. The present study used blogs written by caregivers of persons with dementia to explore how these individuals leveraged this medium as part of the caregiving experience. Blogs written by self-identified informal caregivers of persons with dementia were identified using a systematic search method, and data were analyzed using a qualitative thematic analysis. Four themes emerged from the narratives: social support through communication and engagement, information gathering and seeking, reminiscing and legacy building, and altruism. By understanding the ways in which individuals providing care for persons with dementia use social media as part of the caregiving experience, family nurses can develop interventions and services aimed at improving caregiver burden and quality of life.

Freedom of choice and decision-making in health and social care

People with dementia represent a significant and growing proportion of patients, but little is known about their involvement in making choices about their health or social care. This study explored the experiences of French older patients with dementia and their caregivers about their participation in decision-making. Individual semi-directive interviews were conducted with patients ( n= 21) and their primary carer focusing on a recently made decision (to accept professional help at home, to attend a day centre, or to move into residential care). Five aspects of decision-making were explored: information received; being listened to; expression of opinion; time allowed to reflect on decision; and possibility of changing one's mind. Carers tended to be more satisfied than patients on most criteria. Many patients felt they had not been listened to sufficiently, and had limited freedom to participate in decision-making. Continuing education may help professionals to improve their ability to involve patients with dementia in decision-making concerning their care arrangements.

Advance Care Planning in Dementia: Do Family Carers Know the Treatment Preferences of People with Early Dementia?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

When a person with dementia (PWD) has lost the ability to make treatment decisions, clinicians often rely on family carers to know and articulate these preferences with assumed accuracy. This study used the Life Support Preferences Questionnaire (LSPQ) to explore whether family carers' choices show agreement with the end of life care preferences of the person with dementia for whom they care and what factors influence this.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study interviewing 60 dyads (a person with early dementia and preserved capacity and their family carer) each completing a modified LSPQ. We assessed how closely carers' choices resembled the PWD's preferences for treatment in three proposed health states: the here and now; severe stroke with coma; terminal cancer. Agreement between the PWD and their family carer responses was assessed using Kappa and Prevalence-Adjusted Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAK) statistics. We examined whether carer burden and distress, and relationship quality, influenced agreement.

RESULTS

In interviews PWD were able to indicate their treatment preferences across all three scenarios. In the here-and-now most wanted antibiotics (98%), fewer cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (50%) and tube feeding (47%). In severe stroke and coma antibiotics remained the more preferred treatment (88%), followed by CPR (57%) and tube feeding (30%). In advanced cancer PWD expressed lower preferences for all treatments (antibiotics 68%; CPR 50%; tube feeding 37%). Carers' choices were similar to the PWDs' preferences in the here-and-now (71% (k = 0.03; PABAK = 0.4) with less agreement for future hypothetical health states. In severe stroke and coma carers tended wrongly to suggest that the PWD preferred more intervention (antibiotic, 67%; k = -0.022; PABAK = -0.60; CPR, 73%; k = 0.20; PABAK = -0.20, tube feeding, 66%; k = 0.25; PABAK = -0.12). In advanced cancer the agreement between PWD and carers was low (antibiotics; k = -0.03; PABAK = -0.52; CPR, k = -0.07; PABAK = -0.45; tube feeding; k = 0.20; PABAK = -0.22). However, both PWD and carers showed marked uncertainty about their preferences for end of life treatment choices. Relationship quality, carer distress and burden had no influence on agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to have used the LSPQ with PWD in the UK to consider treatment options in hypothetical illness scenarios. Key finding are that family carers had a low to moderate agreement with PWD on preferences for end of life treatment. This underscores how planning for care at the end of life is beset with uncertainty, even when the carer and PWD perceive the care-giving/receiving relationship is good. Families affected by dementia may benefit from early and ongoing practical and emotional support to prepare for potential changes and aid decision making in the context of the realities of care towards the end of life.

Study partners perform essential tasks in dementia research and can experience burdens and benefits in this role

Most studies that enroll individuals with dementia require a study partner for each participant. Study partners-usually family members-perform several key roles: accompanying the participant to visits, providing information about the participant, and assisting with procedures such as taking medication. Little is known, however, about their experiences when performing these roles. Dementia researchers and institutional review boards need to know these experiences because the study partner role is one key factor in a study's success. This prospective qualitative study, using up to three semi-structured interviews with 62 study partners involved in a range of dementia studies, documented their subjective experiences. Content analysis demonstrates that study partners perform a range of tasks-often within the context of being a caregiver-that enable cognitively impaired individuals to participate in dementia research. These tasks present study partners with unique burdens and benefits, some of which dementia researchers and institutional review boards can address.

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.

A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to and interventions for proxy decision-making by family carers of people with dementia

BACKGROUND

Relatives of people with dementia report that proxy decision-making is difficult and distressing. We systematically reviewed the literature about barriers and facilitators to family carers of people with dementia making proxy decisions, and interventions used to facilitate their decision-making.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and references of included papers up to February 2014. Two authors independently evaluated study quality using a checklist.

RESULTS

We included the 30/104 papers from our search which fitted predetermined criteria and prioritized higher quality papers. Family carers report that proxy decision-making is challenging and can be distressing, especially when decisions are made against the wishes of the care recipient and support from healthcare professionals is lacking. Decision-specific manualized aids have been developed, and while results for those supporting decisions about respite and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding have shown promising results in pilot trials, no intervention has yet been shown to significantly reduce decisional conflict or carer burden, or increase knowledge in randomized controlled trials; a decision aid for advance care planning increased decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend development and testing of decision aids targeting the decisions carers report finding most distressing, including those around where people should live, accessing services, and end of life treatments. Being provided with information to make decisions which have not previously been considered may increase feelings of conflict, suggesting these aids should be carefully targeted.

Beyond competence: advance directives in dementia research

Dementia is highly prevalent and incurable. The participation of dementia patients in clinical research is indispensable if we want to find an effective treatment for dementia. However, one of the primary challenges in dementia research is the patients' gradual loss of the capacity to consent. Patients with dementia are characterized by the fact that, at an earlier stage of their life, they were able to give their consent to participation in research. Therefore, the phase when patients are still competent to decide offers a valuable opportunity to authorize research, by using an advance research directive (ARD). Yet, the use of ARDs as an authorization for research participation remains controversial. In this paper we discuss the role of autonomous decision-making and the protection of incompetent research subjects. We will show why ARDs are a morally defensible basis for the inclusion of this population in biomedical research and that the use of ARDs is compatible with the protection of incompetent research subjects.

Ethical Considerations for the Conduct of Antidementia Trials in Canada

Clinical trials in persons with dementia bring into focus the ethical dilemmas frequently confronting the clinician-scientist. Despite the existence of various ethical guidelines, most with common underlying principles, few are specific to dementia. A particular difficulty is finding a balance between respect for the autonomy of the individual and the protection of vulnerable persons, while at the same time defining an acceptable risk/benefit ratio for the study. The availability of symptomatic treatments for Alzheimer's disease also now make it difficult to argue that withholding treatment from those in the placebo arm of a clinical trial fulfills one's duty to provide best care. Those conducting clinical trials must be knowledgeable about existing legislation and ethical guidelines in order to justify to themselves and others, the design of clinical trials and their risks. They must be prepared to educate patients and family members about dementia and research, determine each potential subject's competence to consent, and ensure that decisions about participation are in accordance with the best interests of the subject. Ethical conduct of clinical trials of new antidementia therapies will require that everyone involved understands the values and beliefs that guide their decision-making and the potentially conflicting roles facing the clinician-scientist.

Deliberating clinical research with cognitively impaired older people and their relatives: an ethical add-on study to the protocol "Effects of Temporary Discontinuation of Antihypertensive Treatment in the Elderly (DANTE) with Cognitive Impairment"

OBJECTIVES

To explore the decision-making process involving elderly subjects with mild cognitive impairment and a relative when asked to participate in a clinical trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this qualitative study, we investigated the decision-making process during the informed consent conversations between the researchers of a clinical trial and 18 persons aged 75 years and older, with a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥21 and ≤27. This assessment was performed by both observation and a standardized interview with the older person and a close relative who could act as a proxy (surrogate) decision maker, if necessary. The informed consent conversation and procedure took place at the home of the potential participants.

MEASUREMENTS

Videotapes or audiotapes were transcribed and analyzed by using coding schemes.

RESULTS

The participants were able to formulate substantial reasons why they would want to participate in the clinical trial. Willingness to help others and contribute to medical knowledge, combined with the absence of substantial risks, were predominant reasons for participation. Most older subjects did consult their relatives, who generally considered them capable of deciding for themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Notwithstanding their (mild) cognitive impairment, these older subjects were able to formulate substantiated reasons for participation in a clinical trial. Thus, it is plausible that they were capable of making this decision themselves, which was affirmed by their relatives. Recognition of the desire to contribute unselfishly to research that might benefit others has important implications for future clinical research conducted in older people with mild cognitive impairment.

Clinical trials involving cats: what factors affect owner participation?

STUDY RATIONALE

Clinical trials are frequently hindered by difficulties in recruiting eligible participants, increasing the timeline and limiting generalizability of results. In veterinary medicine, where proxy enrollment is required, no studies have detailed what factors influence owner participation in clinical trials involving cats. We aimed to investigate these factors through a survey of owners at first opinion practices.

PROTOCOL

The survey was designed using feedback from a pilot study and input from clinical researchers. Owners were asked demographic questions and whether they would, would not, or were unsure about participating in a clinical trial with their cat. They then ranked the importance and influence of various factors on participation using a five-point Likert-type scale, and incentives from most to least encouraging. A total of 413 surveys were distributed to cat owners at four hospitals, two feline-only and two multi-species; 88.6% were completed. Data for importance and influence factors as well as incentive rankings were analyzed overall, and by hospital type, location and whether owners would consider participating.

FINDINGS

The most influential factors were trust in the organization, benefit to the cat and veterinarian recommendation. Importance and influence factors varied by willingness to participate. Ranked incentives were not significantly different across groups, with 'Free Services' ranked highest.

RELEVANCE

This study provides a first look at what factors influence participation in clinical trials with cats. Given the importance placed in the recommendation of veterinarians, continued work is needed to determine veterinarian-related factors affecting clinical trial participation. The results provide guidance towards improved clinical trial design, promotion and education.

Enhancing the informed consent process for critical care research: strategies from a thromboprophylaxis trial

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients lack capacity for decisions about research participation. Consent to enrol these patients in studies is typically obtained from substitute decision-makers.

OBJECTIVE

To present strategies that may optimise the process of obtaining informed consent from substitute decision-makers for participation of critically ill patients in trials. We use examples from a randomised trial of heparin thromboprophylaxis in the intensive care unit (PROTECT, clinicaltrials.gov NCT00182143).

METHODS

3764 patients were randomised, with an informed consent rate of 82%; 90% of consents were obtained from substitute decision-makers. North American PROTECT research coordinators attended three meetings to discuss enrolment: (1) Trial start-up (January 2006); (2) Near trial closure (January 2010); and (3) Post-publication (April 2011). Data were derived from slide presentations, field notes from break-out groups and plenary discussions, then analysed inductively.

RESULTS

We derived three phases for the informed consent process: (1) Preparation for the Consent Encounter; (2) The Consent Encounter; and (3) Follow-up to the Consent Encounter. Specific strategies emerged for each phase: Phase 1 (four strategies); Phase 2 (six strategies); and Phase 3 (three strategies).

CONCLUSION

We identified 13 strategies that may improve the process of obtaining informed consent from substitute decision-makers and be generalisable to other settings and studies.

Establishing the motivations of patients with dementia and cognitive impairment and their carers in joining a dementia research register (DemReg)

BACKGROUND

Connecting willing patients with dementia to suitable clinical research studies has been historically challenging. The United Kingdom Dementia and Neurodegenerative Research Network (DeNDRoN) was established to link patients into high-quality studies. One component is DemReg, a register of dementia patients and their carers who have agreed to be approached regarding future research studies. The limited literature highlights the predominance of altruism mediating research register participation. The objective of this study was to understand the motivations of patients and carers to participate in DemReg.

METHODS

There were 107 participants in the study, interviewed using a questionnaire to determine which factors were important in their decision to be on the register. The study compared the proportion of the altruistic motivations articulated with the proportion of the other answers offered.

RESULTS

The two most important motivators for registering on DemReg were to help others (44%; p < 0.001) or themselves (29%; p < 0.001) and altruistic motives took precedence over those for personal benefit. Participants were not motivated by the prospect of payment or by concern that they would be letting down their clinician if they did not register.

CONCLUSIONS

There are currently major projects within the United Kingdom to increase the number of patients on dementia registers and to further involvement in dementia research. This study, to the best of our knowledge, is the first to assess the motivations of patients and carers for joining a dementia research register in the United Kingdom, and the findings highlight the importance of altruistic motives.

Decision making for participation in dementia research

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the decision-making process used by individuals asked to participate in dementia research and their opinions on how future proxy research decisions would or should be made, including participants' preferred ethical standards for decision making.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional qualitative methods.

SETTING

University research institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

Informants were 39 of 46 individuals with cognitive impairment (i.e., subjects) who were asked to join one of six dementia studies and 46 study partners or surrogate decision makers.

MEASUREMENTS

Semistructured individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for content analysis.

RESULTS

Within dyads, subjects and surrogates often differed in their perspectives on how decisions were made regarding whether to join a study, and no single method was identified as a predominant approach. Although there was only fair agreement within dyads on who ultimately made the decision, subjects and surrogates most often said it was the subject. For future proxy research decisions, subjects and surrogates most often preferred the ethical standard of best interests and least often favored substituted judgment. However, many participants preferred a combination of best interests and substituted judgment or a more complex approach that also considers the interests of others.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with mild to moderate cognitive impairment can and do engage to some extent in the decision-making process for dementia research and can discuss their opinions on how they would want such decisions made for them in the future. These findings support the recommended approach for obtaining proxy consent and subject assent if the individual lacks consent capacity.

"Thinking about it for somebody else": Alzheimer's disease research and proxy decision makers' translation of ethical principles into practice

OBJECTIVES

Ethical guidelines suggest that, when enrolling patients with dementia in research, alterative decision makers (proxies) should base their decision on a "substituted judgment" of how the patient would have decided. If unable to make a substituted judgment, proxies are asked to decide on the basis of the patient's best interests. This mixed-methods study is the first to examine explicitly whether and to what degree proxies differentiate between these two approaches and what considerations influence their mode of decision making.

DESIGN

Interview study regarding enrollment of relative in hypothetical clinical trial of an investigational drug for Alzheimer disease. Participants were randomized to respond to questions about one of four hypothetical clinical trials that differed by levels of described risk and potential benefit.

PARTICIPANTS

Proxy decision makers (N = 40).

MEASUREMENTS

Open-ended and rating-scaled items.

RESULTS

Half of the proxies agreed with both of two rating-scaled items asking about different approaches to decision making-that is, agreeing that they would decide on the basis of how their relative would have decided and agreeing that they would decide on the basis of what they believed was in their relative's best interests. Narrative responses elaborated on themes within the following three major domains: Substituted judgment, best interests, and weighing substituted judgment and best interests. Substituted judgment was framed as honoring the patient's wishes and values. Best interests was described as a perceived duty to maintain quality of life and avoid burdens or risks. Weighing the two standards emerged as a challenging yet important, way of honoring wishes while maintaining quality of life. An unexpected theme was the attempt by alternative decision makers to discern their loved one's current versus premorbid research preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Tensions exist between abstract ethical principles regarding decision-making "standards" and their translation into research decisions.

Alternative decision-makers' perspectives on assent and dissent for dementia research

OBJECTIVES

Investigators generally address the ethical dilemma of patients' decisional impairment in Alzheimer disease (AD) research by obtaining consent from alternative or surrogate decision makers ("proxies") as well as assent from patients. How these proxies conceptualize patient assent, or lack of objection, to participate may influence decisions made of the patients' behalf, but has been little studied. This report examines statements of proxies relevant to how they conceptualized assent and dissent to research.

DESIGN

Surveys and in-depth interviews of proxies presented with hypothetical scenario related to enrolling relatives with AD in a clinical trial of an investigational drug for AD.

PARTICIPANTS

Proxies (n = 25) for people with AD.

MEASUREMENTS

Open-ended and rating-scaled items assessing perspectives on enrollment in research, influences on decision-making, and willingness to override a relative's preferences regarding research participation. Statements with relevance to assent or dissent were coded.

RESULTS

Proxies described looking for consistent behavioral or verbal indications of assent versus objection when trying to determine patients' preferences. However, proxies sometimes expressed willingness to override patients' desires in favor of patients' presumed best interests. The amnestic nature of the disorder led some proxies to justify overriding temporary dissent or discomfort in the interest of promoting patients' values. Patients' dependence on their caregivers for decision-making, and caregivers' awareness of their ability to persuade their relatives, also emerged in descriptions of the decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

Proxies' statements regarding a hypothetical research enrollment decision revealed several themes with implications for the concepts of assent and dissent. Proxies may persuade or influence patients to promote the patient's best interests or values. Further work, particularly examining actual decision-making, is warranted to determine how best to operationalize the concepts of assent and dissent in the context of research involving decisionally impaired adults.

Addressing the challenges to successful recruitment and retention in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials

Among the key challenges in Alzheimer's disease drug development is the timely completion of clinical trials. Unfortunately, clinical trials often suffer from slow or insufficient enrollment. Successful clinical trial recruitment describes a balance between expeditiously achieving full enrollment and ensuring an appropriate study sample. Investigators face a number of challenges to the successful negotiation of this balance. The failure to address these challenges means that drug development may take more time and money and that trial results may not adequately represent drug efficacy or may not be applicable beyond the study. We review the challenges to recruitment and retention in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials and present a framework to address them.

The Nature of Relationships in Alternative Dementia Care Environments

Avec l'aide de sept entrevues et l'observation de terrain conduite dans deux contextes contrastes – un établissement spécialisé pour personnes âgées et un camp de vacances d'été, nous avons constatez dans cette enquête d'analyse, que deux stratégies différentes sont utilisées par des hommes âgés souffrant de démence. Le premier est un rapport fonctionnel, le deuxième est un rapport de support. Notamment, dans des rapports de support, les participants ont employé l'humour et la nostalgie. Tandis que dans un contexte plus sociable et dépourvu de règlements (le camp de vacances par exemple), les rapports ont changé, et inclus des principes d'égalité, d'interactions personnelles, la réciprocité, et de la confiance.

The representation of healthcare end users' perspectives by surrogates in healthcare decisions: a literature review

BACKGROUND

The representation of end users' perspectives in healthcare decisions requires involvement of their surrogates when the end users, i.e. certain patients, elderly people, children and people with disabilities, are unable to present their views.

AIMS

To review critical issues, and the advantages and disadvantages of involving surrogates in representing end users' perspectives in healthcare decisions.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature published in peer-reviewed journals from 1990 to 2005.

RESULTS

Findings show that surrogates are used widely in health care and that they are necessary to represent end users' perspectives in healthcare decisions when the latter are unable to do so themselves. Critical issues in using surrogates include key ethical, social, cultural, legal and medico-technological factors; ascertaining the best interest of end users; potential conflict of interest; possible biased decisions and the burden on surrogates. The key advantage of surrogate involvement in healthcare decisions is their ability to represent end users' needs, values and wishes. The main disadvantages include potential discrepancies between the decisions and conclusions of surrogates and end users; the failure of surrogates to predict end users' preferences accurately and the lack of certainty that useful information will be obtained through the surrogacy process.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has revealed that the involvement of surrogates is an additional vital way to represent end users' perspectives in healthcare decisions where for a range of reasons their opinions are unable to be effectively ascertained. However, because of the heterogeneity of surrogates and end users, the selection of appropriate surrogates and deploying surrogate decisions require particularly careful consideration of their value in individual cases; thus, subsequent decision-making must be reviewed on a case-to-case basis to seek to ensure that the best interests, needs and wishes of the end user are fully and accurately represented.

Research ethics issues in geriatric psychiatry

Progress in geriatric psychiatric research may be impeded by lack of attention to collecting evidence relevant to ethical issues. As has been noted for some time, unless proactive work is done to identify, clarify, and remediate ethical challenges (see Table 2 for research directions), deleterious effects on research can result, including research bans, unduly overprotective stances, or inaccurate weighing of risks and benefits of research by review boards. With regard to proxy consent, a number of issues require further study. These include: how state laws address (or fail to address) research involving cognitively impaired individuals and what effects this has on research conduct; how IRBs define and weigh risks and benefits in considering research involving proxy consent; how various stakeholders, including the general public, people with disorders that may impair decision-making capacity, and proxies themselves view proxy consent for research; and to what degree proxies' research decisions reflect what patients themselves would decide. The use of advanced directives as a stand alone method for future consent is fraught with difficulties around adequate informed consent for a particular study; however, future study may clarify if such directives provide surrogates with improved understanding of their relative's overall views of the research enterprise and possibly the types of studies they would be willing to participate in even if they are no longer able to provide their own consent. In depression and suicide research, further work is needed to develop standard procedures for meeting the ethical demands of research while conducting rigorous, crucial research.

Consent in Alzheimer's disease research: risk/benefit factors

In the era of chronic disease, we are challenged to find therapies that provide symptomatic relief and ideally, alter the course of the underlying disease. In Alzheimer's disease (AD), these issues are complicated by the disease itself, which affects the subject's decision-making capacity for participation in the research. According to established ethical guidelines it is clear that individuals with impaired capacity may participate in research and their risk should be no greater than that which the individual would have in day to day activities with anticipation of benefits within that realm. Decision making processes are complex and involve proxies who themselves have biases about their loved one and the potential for participating in the research. Newer disease-modifying approaches such as immunotherapy have potential for affecting the course of the underlying disease but with greater risk of more significant side effects. Ideally the health care of the subjects is not disadvantaged by research participation. At the same time, trials of potentially riskier therapy are relevant in subjects with the disease. Research for subjects with AD must have appropriate safeguards in place to enable effective progress in innovative therapy for a vulnerable, often elderly population. Recommendations are made which could further our capacity to undertake ethical research in the AD population.

Proxies and Consent Discussions for Dementia Research

OBJECTIVES

To better understand the nature of informed consent encounters for research involving patients with dementia that requires proxy consent.

DESIGN

Audiotaping of informed-consent encounters for a study of genetic markers for sporadic Alzheimer's disease.

SETTING

Outpatients at an Alzheimer's disease research center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with dementia and their companions.

MEASUREMENTS

Audiotapes were analyzed to characterize communication style and coverage of the standard elements of informed consent and, using the Roter Interaction Analysis System, to capture the dynamics of three-way interaction between the patient, their companion, and the physician investigator.

RESULTS

Of 26 informed consent encounters, all involved a patient, a companion, and a physician. Patients had a mean Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 21.8. For patients, 49% of their interactions involved agreement and approval (positive statements), 16% psychosocial information, 7% biomedical information, 7% asking questions, and 7% expressing emotion. Companion interactions involved 37% positive statements and 19% biomedical information. Physician interactions involved emotional expressiveness (30%) and positive statements (19%). Discussion length was positively related to MMSE score (Spearman rho=0.45; P<.02). Coverage of required elements of informed consent was fairly comprehensive and had no relationship to patients' MMSE scores.

CONCLUSION

These data should inform policies regarding the ethically appropriate ways of conducting research with cognitively impaired adults. For example, patients in this study were more silent than their companions and the physician, but when patients spoke, they primarily agreed with what was said. Although this might first seem to signal assent, such an interpretation should be made with caution for persons with dementia. In addition, previous work on informed consent has focused on its cognitive aspects, but these data reveal that the emotional and social dimensions warrant attention.

The capacity to appoint a proxy and the possibility of concurrent proxy directives

With the projected increase in the number of persons with dementia (who eventually lose their capacity to give informed consent to treatment and research), third-party decision-making will become even more common than it is today. We argue that, because there are situations in which an appointed proxy is preferred over a de facto surrogate, it is ethically important to understand the capacity of persons with dementia to delegate their decision-making authority regarding treatment and research decisions. In this paper, focusing mainly on the research consent context, we examine the idea that persons suffering from neurodegenerative disorders may retain significant abilities-including sufficient capacity for delegating one's authority for giving consent to research-even if they are not capable of giving independent consent themselves. We first propose a rationale for assessing the capacity to appoint a proxy and then describe a novel interview instrument for assessing the capacity to appoint a proxy for research consent.

Alzheimer disease ethics--informed consent and related issues in clinical trials: results of a survey among the members of the Research Ethics Committees in Sweden

The rapid advances in biomedical sciences have induced special moral and ethical attitudes, which ought to be taken into account. One of the most essential issues is the principles for participation in research of subjects with reduced decision-making capacity. We conducted a questionnaire survey among members of the research ethics committees in Sweden to find out their attitudes to a range of ethical issues related to research on subjects with Alzheimer's disease. One hundred thirty-six of those approached responded (66%), and 117 of the responses (56%) were considered substantially complete. There were 16 questions with fixed reply alternatives. Some central questions concerned the informed consent process. With a few exceptions, there were no significant differences in attitudes between the experts and laypersons, between persons of different ages, and between men and women. However, women and laypersons were in general keener to preserve the patient's integrity and the experts were more willing than the laypersons to allow participation of subjects with dementia in placebo-controlled trials.

Surrogate decision-making and related issues

This article discusses the role of surrogate decision-makers for persons who are cognitively impaired and cannot give informed consent. Questions raised follow. Is surrogate consent in research analogous to proxy consent in health care? What are some issues in surrogate consent? How does the risk-benefit ratio affect the consent process? What are the investigator's responsibilities regarding surrogate consent? Issues discussed include advance directives, durable power of attorney, legally authorized representatives, substituted judgment, double informed consent, responsibilities of surrogates, and barriers to informed consent. The article ends with recommendations to clarify state and national laws, change research designs, and establish a national mechanism for reviewing promising research that is usually prohibited.

Conducting research that involves subjects at the end of life who are unable to give consent

This paper examines the conditions that describe when it is appropriate to conduct research that enrolls a subject near the end-of-life who cannot provide an informed consent. Specifically, it describes conditions that justify when it is acceptable to expose a person to the risks, burdens or discomforts of an intervention that is not intended to benefit that person but to produce generalizable knowledge that will benefit other people. These conditions are: (1) acceptable research risks, (2) proxy decision making, (3) subject assent and dissent, and (4) subject advance consent.

Consent and refusal in dementia research: conceptual and practical considerations

This article discusses types of consent refusals, rates of refusal, factors that affect consent, and methods to increase rates of consent in elderly research participants and in those with dementia in particular. Refusals can be categorized according to several types: complete refusal, refusal that is time-contingent, partial refusal, and contingent agreement. Rates of consent vary greatly across studies of persons with dementia. This variation can also be affected by different methodologies of calculating rates, in addition to differences in content of studies, populations, and procedures. To warrant consent, a study must first be scientifically sound, with a high likelihood of advancing knowledge, and must provide maximal protection to participants. Consent rates are affected by the following factors: levels of anticipated risks and benefits of the study, relationships among the different caregivers involved in the care of the potential subject, the ability of the researcher to properly identify and locate the person who needs to provide consent, characteristics and attitudes of the person providing consent, and the method of obtaining consent, including timing, location, method of presentation, and type of consent requested. An understanding of these issues can assist the researcher in tailoring research procedures so as to maximize rates of consent. It also raises ethical issues that warrant further discussion concerning the process of obtaining consent from and for persons with dementia.

Alzheimer's disease patients' and caregivers' capacity, competency, and reasons to enroll in an early-phase Alzheimer's disease clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To examine the capacity, competency, and reasons for enrolling of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and of their caregivers in an early phase AD clinical trial.

DESIGN

Interviews were conducted with patients with AD, nondemented older persons, and caregivers.

SETTING

Participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen patients with mild to moderate AD, 15 age- and education-matched nondemented older persons, and 15 patient caregivers.

MEASUREMENTS

Capacity was measured using the MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR); a study coordinator who reviewed audiotapes of the capacity interviews judged competency, and the reasons for a decision were determined by coding the capacity interviews.

RESULTS

On all measures except the ability to make a choice, patients performed worse than controls (understanding: z = 3.2, P =.001; appreciation: z = 2.8, P =.005; reasoning: z = 3.5, P =.0005), and caregivers (understanding: z = 3.8, P =.0002; appreciation: z = 3.0, P =.003; reasoning: z = 3.6, P =.0003). Using the controls' performance to set psychometric criteria to define capacity, the proportions of patients with adequate understanding, appreciation, and reasoning were six of 15 (40%), three of 15 (20%), and five of 15 (33%). All caregivers and nine of the 15 (60%) patients were competent. Reasons for enrolling typically featured the potential benefit to the patients' health or well-being and altruism that was expressed as a desire to help other patients and their families or a desire to contribute to scientific knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

The MacCAT-CR, in particular its understanding scale, is a reliable and valid way to assess patient capacity and competency to enroll in an early-phase clinical trial. Although many patients have significant impairments in their capacity, some mild-stage patients are competent. Reasons for enrolling in an early-phase trial blend an expectation of therapeutic benefit and a desire to help others.

Addressing the challenges of transforming laboratory advances into Alzheimer's Disease treatments

This essay addresses the challenges of clinical trials to develop treatments for Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The issues covered are enrolling subjects, defining clinically meaningful endpoints, and making the claim that a drug slows the progression of the disease. The perspective to address these challenges is that dementia research should embrace a biopsychosocial model for drug development. In this model, the patient and caregiver are seen as interrelated subjects of both treatment and research and outcome measures reflect biomarkers of the disease, the functional morbidity of AD and the distress of caregiving.

A national survey of provisions in clinical-trial agreements between medical schools and industry sponsors

BACKGROUND

Concerned about threats to the integrity of clinical trials in a research environment increasingly controlled by private interests, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has issued revised guidelines for investigators' participation in the study design, access to data, and control over publication. It is unclear whether research conducted at academic institutions adheres to these new standards.

METHODS

From November 2001 through January 2002, we interviewed officials at U.S. medical schools about provisions in their institutions' agreements with industry sponsors of multicenter clinical trials. A subgroup of the respondents were also asked about coordinating-center agreements for such trials.

RESULTS

Of the 122 medical schools that are members of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 108 participated in the survey. The median number of site-level agreements executed per institution in the previous year was 103 (interquartile range, 50 to 210). Scores for compliance with a wide range of provisions--from ensuring that authors of reports on multicenter trials have access to all trial data (1 percent [interquartile range, 0 to 21]) to addressing the plan for data collection and monitoring (10 percent [interquartile range, 1 to 50])--demonstrated limited adherence to the standards embodied in the new ICMJE guidelines. Scores for coordinating-center agreements were somewhat higher for most survey items.

CONCLUSIONS

Academic institutions routinely engage in industry-sponsored research that fails to adhere to ICMJE guidelines regarding trial design, access to data, and publication rights. Our findings suggest that a reevaluation of the process of contracting for clinical research is urgently needed.