Informed consent for neonatal trials: practical points to consider and a check list

Parental views on prospective consent: Experience from a pilot randomised trial recruiting extremely preterm infants during the perinatal period

AIM

To explore parental perceptions of the consenting process and understanding of the study in a pilot randomised controlled trial wherein extremely premature infants (<29 weeks' gestation) were recruited either antenatally or by 4 h of life.

METHODS

We prospectively surveyed parents who had consented, declined consent or were eligible infants in the Positioning Preterm Infants for Neuroprotection study, a low-risk intervention study in the first 72 h of life. Structured interview questions explored the process and acceptability of the consenting approach by the parents and their knowledge of the study. Additional comments made by the parents were transcribed verbatim.

RESULTS

Sixty-two parents participated in the surveys; of those, 41 had provided their consent, 8 declined consent and 13 were parents of missed eligible infants. Overall, most parents reported they understood the study well before providing their consent and approaching them for consenting did not create a burden for them. A verbal explanation of the study by the study team, especially by the medical practitioners, was viewed as beneficial. Where consent was obtained in the birthing unit (imminent births and within 4 h of birthing), it was suggested that the 4-h period for obtaining post-natal consent may be too short. A deferred consent with a follow-up opportunity for obtaining informed consent could be a suitable alternative.

CONCLUSION

Parents found the consenting process acceptable and indicated they had sufficient understanding of the study to provide an informed consent. Deferred consent should be explored for future, low-risk intervention studies as an alternative to prospective consent where extremely preterm infants need to be recruited in the immediate neonatal period.

Parental impact during and after neonatal intensive care admission

Parents play a pivotal role in neurodevelopmental outcomes of their children in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and beyond. Integration of parents in clinical care and research is synergistic. Engaged parents yield more comprehensive clinical care and more robust and meaningful research products. Subsequently, successful clinical and research efforts improve outcomes for children. We review strategies for parental integration into NICU clinical care and research, including parental involvement in therapeutic interventions and neurodevelopmental care, and effective communication strategies for clinicians and researchers. We discuss challenges in neonatal trials and emphasize the need for building a culture of research, collaborative partnerships with patient advocacy organizations, and ongoing support beyond the NICU. Overall, we call for recognizing and fostering the impactful role of parents as teammates with clinicians and researchers in optimizing neurodevelopmental outcomes in the NICU and beyond.

Developments in the Design, Conduct, and Reporting of Child Health Trials

To identify priority areas to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of pediatric clinical trials, the international expert network, Standards for Research (StaR) in Child Health, was assembled and published the first 6 Standards in Pediatrics in 2012. After a recent review summarizing the 247 publications by StaR Child Health authors that highlight research practices that add value and reduce research "waste," the current review assesses the progress in key child health trial methods areas: consent and recruitment, containing risk of bias, roles of data monitoring committees, appropriate sample size calculations, outcome selection and measurement, and age groups for pediatric trials. Although meaningful change has occurred within the child health research ecosystem, measurable progress is still disappointingly slow. In this context, we identify and review emerging trends that will advance the agenda of increased clinical usefulness of pediatric trials, including patient and public engagement, Bayesian statistical approaches, adaptive designs, and platform trials. We explore how implementation science approaches could be applied to effect measurable improvements in the design, conducted, and reporting of child health research.

Parental perceptions of informed consent in a study of tracheal intubations in neonatal intensive care

Background and objective

Obtaining informed consent in neonatal emergency research is challenging. The aim of this study was to assess parental perceptions of informed consent following participation in a clinical trial in neonatal emergency care.

Methods

This was a supplementary analysis of a randomised controlled trial comparing video and direct laryngoscopy for neonatal endotracheal intubation in the delivery room and neonatal intensive care unit. After obtaining informed consent for the clinical trial, parents were asked to answer a series of self-administered questions about their perceptions of clinical trial participation and the consent process. Informed consent had been given either before birth, after birth but before inclusion in the trial, or after inclusion in the trial.

Results

We received responses from 33 mothers and 27 fathers (n = 60) of the 63 preterm and term infants who participated in the study. Fifty-three (89.8%, n = 59) parents agreed that infants should participate in clinical trials, and 51 (85%, n = 60) parents agreed that parents should be asked for informed consent. Fifty-three (89.8%, n = 59) parents felt that their infant's participation in this particular trial would be beneficial. Fifty-two (86.7%, n = 60) parents felt that the informed consent process was satisfactory. One parent (100%, n = 1) approached before birth, 23 parents (82.1%, n = 28) approached after birth but before enrolment and 26 (83.9%, n = 31) parents approached after enrolment were satisfied with the timing of the consent process. Eight (13.3%, n = 60) parents felt some pressure to provide informed consent. Of these, two (25%) were approached before enrolment and six (75%) were approached after enrolment.

Conclusion

Parents valued their infant's participation in an emergency neonatal clinical trial and considered it important to be asked for consent. In this study, it seemed less important whether consent was obtained before or after the intervention. Future studies may need to investigate which form of consent is most acceptable to parents for the individual study in question.

Ethical Considerations in Neonatal Research

Children are considered a vulnerable population and have traditionally been excluded from research studies. This exclusion of children in general, and neonates in particular, from clinical research hampers the development of safe and effective therapies in this population. However, research involving children (including infants) is essential to guide therapy and optimize care. Neonatal research is complex, time intensive, difficult and expensive to conduct, and raises some unique ethical considerations. The complexity of research in this population is highlighted by the fear of causing harm to fragile sick infants which has led to the creation of special regulations on the degree of risk exposure permissible in research involving infants. This is further compounded by the inability of infants to provide informed consent or assent and the reliance on obtaining surrogate consent from parents who may themselves be vulnerable and overwhelmed by their infant's illness and the amount of information provided to them. In this review, we discuss the evolution of ethical regulations related to research, the justification for research in infants, and some of the ethical nuances of research in this population.

Analysis of Paediatric Clinical Trial Characteristics and Activity Over 23 Years-Impact of the European Paediatric Regulation on a Single French Clinical Research Center

As unlicensed or off-label drugs are frequently prescribed in children, the European Pediatric Regulation came into force in 2007 to improve the safe use of medicinal products in the pediatric population. This present report analyzes the pediatric research trials over 23 years in a clinical research center dedicated to children and the impact of regulation. The database of trial characteristics from 1998 to 2020 was analyzed. We also searched for differences between two periods (1998-2006 and 2007-2020) and between institutional and industrial sponsors during the whole period (1998-2020). A total of 379 pediatric trials were initiated at our center, corresponding to inclusion of 7955 subjects and 19448 on-site patient visits. The trials were predominantly drug evaluation trials (n = 278, 73%), sponsored by industries (n = 216, 57%) or government/non-profit institutions (n = 163, 43%). All age groups and most subspecialties were concerned. We noted an important and regular increase in the number of trials conducted over the years, with an increased number of multinational, industrially sponsored trials. Based on the data presented, areas of improvement are discussed: (1) following ethical and regulatory approval depending on the sponsor, the mean time needed for administrative and financial agreement, validation of trial procedures allowing trial initiation at the level of the center was 6.3 and 6.5 months (periods 1 and 2, respectively) and should be reduced, (2) availability of expert research teams remain insufficient, time dedicated to research attributed to physicians should be organized and recognition of research nurses is required. The positive impact of the European Pediatric Regulation highlights the need to increase the availability of trained research teams, organized within identified multicenter international pediatric research networks.

Parental and professional perceptions of informed consent and participation in a time-critical neonatal trial: a mixed-methods study in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

Introduction

Time-critical neonatal trials in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) raise several ethical issues. Using a qualitative-dominant mixed-methods design, we explored informed consent process in Hypothermia for encephalopathy in low and middle-income countries (HELIX) trial conducted in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

Methods

Term infants with neonatal encephalopathy, aged less than 6 hours, were randomly allocated to cooling therapy or usual care, following informed parental consent. The consenting process was audio-video (A-V) recorded in all cases. We analysed A-V records of the consent process using a 5-point Likert scale on three parameters—empathy, information and autonomy. In addition, we used exploratory observation method to capture relevant aspects of consent process and discussions between parents and professionals. Finally, we conducted in-depth interviews with a subgroup of 20 parents and 15 healthcare professionals. A thematic analysis was performed on the observations of A-V records and on the interview transcripts.

Results

A total of 294 A-V records of the HELIX trial were analysed. Median (IQR) score for empathy, information and autonomy was 5 (0), 5 (1) and 5 (1), respectively. However, thematic analysis suggested that the consenting was a ceremonial process; and parental decision to participate was based on unreserved trust in the treating doctors, therapeutic misconception and access to an expensive treatment free of cost. Most parents did not understand the concept of a clinical trial nor the nature of the intervention. Professionals showed a strong bias towards cooling therapy and reported time constraints and explaining to multiple family members as key challenges.

Conclusion

Despite rigorous research governance and consent process, parental decisions were heavily influenced by situational incapacity and a trust in doctors to make the right decision on their behalf. Further research is required to identify culturally and context-appropriate strategies for informed trial participation.

Clinical Research in Neonates: Redesigning the Informed Consent Process in the Digital Era

Background: Currently, many initiatives are devoted to optimizing informed consent for participation in clinical research. Due to the digital transformation in health care, a shift toward electronic informed consent (eIC) has been fostered. However, empirical evidence on how to implement eIC in clinical research involving neonates is lacking. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 health care professionals active in Belgium or the Netherlands. All health care professionals had experience in conducting clinical research involving neonates. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using the framework method. Results: Interviewees generally supported the use of eIC in clinical research involving neonates. For example, eIC could enable parents to receive study feedback via the eIC system. Requirements were expressed for parental involvement to decide on which feedback would be appropriate to return. Moreover, experts specialized in presenting information and designing electronic systems should be involved. Broad consensus among health care professionals indicates that the face-to-face-interaction between parents and the research team is vital to establish a relationship of trust. Therefore, it is necessary that the use of eIC runs alongside personal interactions with the parents. Concerns were raised about the accessibility of eIC to parents. For this reason, it was suggested that parents should always be given the possibility to read and sign a paper-based informed consent form or to use eIC. Conclusions: Health care professionals' views indicate that the use of eIC in clinical research with neonates may offer various opportunities. Further development and implementation will require a multi-stakeholder approach.