'The words will pass with the blowing wind': staff and parent views of the deferred consent process, with prior assent, used in an emergency fluids trial in two African hospitals

Parent Attitudes to Research Without Prior Consent in Two Pediatric Emergency Clinical Trials in Australia: A Qualitative Study of Transcripts From 2017

OBJECTIVES

Research in critically ill children poses challenges in acquiring prospective informed consent. International ethical guidelines generally have provisions to perform research without prior consent (RWPC) in circumstances where consent is not feasible, but there is a paucity of data regarding the community acceptance of this process. The objectives of the current study were to explore the attitudes and experiences of parents of children enrolled into trials to determine understanding and acceptability of RWPC to parents of children involved.

DESIGN

Qualitative study of semi-structured telephone interviews in 2017 exploring themes of medical research, trial participation in RWPC. Interview transcripts underwent inductive thematic analysis with intercoder agreement, using Nvivo 14 software.

SETTING

Two clinical interventional trials in Australia conducted in critically ill children without prospective consent.

SUBJECTS

Parents of children enrolled in critical care research.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 49 interviews were conducted and analyzed. Parents of participants were supportive of processes used in the trials and RWPC. Paperwork was often not thought to contribute to improved understanding, with verbal information more valued. There was no consensus on the optimal approach of RWPC in situations when clinical outcome was poor.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study in 2017 shows that parent/carer supported RWPC in two pediatric trials involving critically ill children. Parents were satisfied with existing approval methods and safeguards. Parents valued brief verbal information at the time of randomization. These historical findings support the feasibility of conducting research on time-sensitive interventions in emergency settings with RWPC, aligning with community expectations.

Perceptions of consent for a paediatric telehealth trial during emergency transport in Pakistan

INTRODUCTION

Childhood mortality in the emergency setting is disproportionately high in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC), with limited research dedicated to improving timely interventions, especially for critically ill children during transport. To perform essential prehospital paediatric research, there is a need for a tailored consent process, which reflects the specific needs and concerns of participants in this challenging research context.

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to prospectively investigate stakeholder perceptions and preferences regarding consent processes for a specific paediatric ambulance-based telemedicine trial.

METHODS

Exploratory qualitative study design using face-to-face semistructured interviews and focus group discussions. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Participants included healthcare providers (paediatric telemedicine physicians and emergency medical technicians) and parents of children who required emergency transportation in Karachi, Pakistan.

RESULTS

47 participants, ranging from 19 to 47 years old, were involved in in-depth interviews or focus group discussions. The participants comprised 29 healthcare workers and 18 parents. Among them, 9 were women and 38 were men. Expressing diverse attitudes towards different consent methods, the majority recommended a prospective written informed consent approach to build trust and provide legal protection. Participants understood the situational incapacity that occurs in emergency settings, emphasised the importance of keeping the consent brief and recommended a subsequent contact in 2-3 days after the emergency transport to reconfirm consent and answer any questions.

CONCLUSION

Our interpretation of the findings revealed that participants preferred a staged consent process for telemedicine trials in LMIC paediatric emergency settings.

Embedding treatment in stronger care systems

A key lesson from the west Africa (2014-16) Ebola disease epidemic was that outbreak responses fail when they respond to patients through a narrow clinical lens without considering the broader community and social context of care. Here, in the second of two Series papers on the modern landscape of Ebola disease, we review progress made in the last decade to improve patient-centred care. Although the biosafety imperatives of treating Ebola disease remain, recent advances show how to mitigate these so that patients are cared for in a safe and dignified manner that encourages early treatment-seeking behaviour and provides support after the return of patients to their communities. We review advances in diagnostics, including faster Ebola disease detection via real-time RT-PCR, and consider design improvements in Ebola disease treatment units that enhance patient safety and dignity. We also review advances in care provision, such as the integration of palliative care and mobile communication into routine care, and address how greater access to research is possible through harmonised clinical trials. Finally, we discuss how strengthened community engagement and psychosocial programmes are addressing stigma and providing holistic support for survivors.

Impact of early continuous positive airway pressure in the delivery room (DR-CPAP) on neonates < 1500 g in a low-resource setting: a protocol for a pilot feasibility and acceptability randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Preterm birth is the leading cause of childhood mortality, and respiratory distress syndrome is the predominant cause of these deaths. Early continuous positive airway pressure is effective in high-resource settings, reducing the rate of continuous positive airway pressure failure, and the need for mechanical ventilation and surfactant. However, most deaths in preterm infants occur in low-resource settings without access to mechanical ventilation or surfactant. We hypothesize that in such settings, early continuous positive airway pressure will reduce the rate of failure and therefore preterm mortality.

METHODS

This is a mixed methods feasibility and acceptability, single-center pilot randomized control trial of early continuous positive airway pressure among infants with birthweight 800-1500 g. There are two parallel arms: (i) application of continuous positive airway pressure; with optional oxygen when indicated; applied in the delivery room within 15 min of birth; transitioning to bubble continuous positive airway pressure after admission to the neonatal unit if Downes Score ≥ 4 (intervention), (ii) supplementary oxygen at delivery when indicated; transitioning to bubble continuous positive airways pressure after admission to the neonatal unit if Downes Score ≥ 4 (control). A two-stage consent process (verbal consent during labor, followed by full written consent within 24 h of birth) and a low-cost third-party allocation process for randomization will be piloted. We will use focus group discussions and key informant interviews to explore the acceptability of the intervention, two-stage consent process, and trial design. We will interview healthcare workers, mothers, and caregivers of preterm infants. Feasibility will be assessed by the proportion of infants randomized within 15 min of delivery; the proportion of infants in the intervention arm receiving CPAP within 15 min of delivery; and the proportion of infants with primary and secondary outcomes measured successfully.

DISCUSSION

This pilot trial will enhance our understanding of methods and techniques that can enable emergency neonatal research to be carried out effectively, affordably, and acceptably in low-resource settings. This mixed-methods approach will allow a comprehensive exploration of parental and healthcare worker perceptions, experiences, and acceptance of the intervention and trial design.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered on the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR) PACTR202208462613789. Registered 08 August 2022.  https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=23888 .

A Phase I trial of Non-invasive Ventilation and seizure prophylaxis with levetiracetam In Children with Cerebral Malaria Trial (NOVICE-M Trial)

Background

African children with cerebral malaria and seizures caused Plasmodium falciparum are at greater risk of poor outcomes including death and neurological sequelae. The agonal events are severe hypoventilation and respiratory arrest often triggered by seizures. We hypothesised that prophylactic anti-seizure medication (ASM) could avert 'spikes' of intracranial pressure during or following seizures and that adequate ventilation could be supported by biphasic Cuirass Ventilation (BCV) which requires no intubation.

Methods

A Phase I trial conducted in Kilifi, Kenya designed to provide data on safety, feasibility and preliminary data on seizure control using prophylactic ASM (levetiracetam) and BCV as non-invasive ventilatory support in children with cerebral malaria. Children aged 3 months to 12-years hospitalised with P falciparum malaria (positive rapid diagnostic test or a malaria slide), a Blantyre Coma Score ≤2 and a history of acute seizures in this illness are eligible for the trial. In a phased evaluation we will study i) BCV alone for respiratory support (n=10); ii) prophylactic LVT: 40mg/kg loading dose then 30mg/kg every 12 hours given via nasogastric tube for 72 hours (or until fully conscious) plus BCV support (n=10) and; iii) prophylactic LVT: 60mg/kg loading dose then 45mg/kg every 12 hours given via nasogastric tube for 72 hours (or until fully conscious) plus BCV support (n=10). Primary outcome measure: cumulative time with a clinically detected seizures or number of observed seizures over 36 hours. Secondary outcomes will be assessed by feasibility or ability to implement BCV, and recovery from coma within 36 hours. Safety endpoints include: aspiration during admission; death at 28 days and 180 days; and de-novo neurological impairments at 180 days.

Conclusions

This is a Phase I trial largely designed to test the feasibility, tolerability and safety of using non-invasive ventilatory support and LVT prophylaxis in cerebral malaria.

Registration

ISRCTN76942974 (5.02.2019); PACTR202112749708968 (20.12.2021).

Practical approaches for supporting informed consent in neonatal clinical trials

The survival and health of preterm and critically ill infants have markedly improved over the past 50  years, supported by well-conducted neonatal research. However, newborn research is difficult to undertake for many reasons, and obtaining informed consent for research in this population presents several unique ethical and logistical challenges. In this article, we explore methods to facilitate the consent process, including the role of checklists to support meaningful informed consent for neonatal clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The authors provide practical guidance on the design and implementation of an effective consent checklist tailored for use in neonatal clinical research.

Questioning approaches to consent in time critical obstetric trials: findings from a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

Trial legislation enables research to be conducted without prior consent (RWPC) in emergency situations, yet this approach has rarely been used in time-critical obstetric trials. This study explored views and experiences of antenatal recruitment and consent and RWPC in an emergency intrapartum randomised clinical trial.

DESIGN

Embedded, mixed-methods study within a trial, involving questionnaires, recorded recruitment discussions, interviews and focus groups in the first 13 months of trial recruitment (December 2020-January 2022).

SETTING

COPE is a double-blind randomised controlled trial, comparing the effectiveness of carboprost or oxytocin as first-line treatment of postpartum haemorrhage.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred and eighty-six people (190 women/96 birth partners), linked to 198/380 (52%) COPE recruits participated in the embedded study. Of these, 272 completed a questionnaire (178 women/94 birth partners), 22 were interviewed (19 women/3 birth partners) and 16 consent discussions with 12 women were recorded. Twenty-seven staff took part in three focus groups and nine staff were interviewed.

RESULTS

Participants recommended that information about the study should be more accessible antenatally for those who wish to be informed. Most women and staff did not think it would be appropriate to seek consent during pregnancy or early labour as it may cause 'unnecessary panic' and lead to research waste, as most women would not become eligible. There was support for the use of RWPC as COPE interventions are used in standard clinical practice and viewed as low risk. Women who were approached about the trial while having a postpartum haemorrhage also supported RWPC as they could not recall research discussions.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support the use of RWPC for time-critical interventions, and raise questions about the appropriateness of other commonly used consent pathways, including antenatal consent and verbal assent.

Stakeholders' perspectives on clinical trial acceptability and approach to consent within a limited timeframe: a mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

The Bronchiolitis Endotracheal Surfactant Study (BESS) is a randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy of endo-tracheal surfactant therapy for critically ill infants with bronchiolitis. To explore acceptability of BESS, including approach to consent within a limited time frame, we explored parent and staff experiences of trial involvement in the first two bronchiolitis seasons to inform subsequent trial conduct.

DESIGN

A mixed-method embedded study involving a site staff survey, questionnaires and interviews with parents approached about BESS.

SETTING

Fourteen UK paediatric intensive care units.

PARTICIPANTS

Of the 179 parents of children approached to take part in BESS, 75 parents (of 69 children) took part in the embedded study. Of these, 55/69 (78%) completed a questionnaire, and 15/69 (21%) were interviewed. Thirty-eight staff completed a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. All constructs of the Adapted Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were met. Parents viewed surfactant as being low risk and hoped their child's participation would help others in the future. Although parents supported research without prior consent in studies of time critical interventions, they believed there was sufficient time to consider this trial. Parents recommended that prospective informed consent should continue to be sought for BESS. Many felt that the time between the consent process and intervention being administered took too long and should be 'streamlined' to avoid delays in administration of trial interventions. Staff described how the training and trial processes worked well, yet patients were missed due to lack of staff to deliver the intervention, particularly at weekends.

CONCLUSION

Parents and staff supported BESS trial and highlighted aspects of the protocol, which should be refined, including a streamlined informed consent process. Findings will be useful to inform proportionate approaches to consent in future paediatric trials where there is a short timeframe for consent discussions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11746266.

Parental perspectives about information and deferred versus two-stage consent in studies of neonatal asphyxia

OBJECTIVE

The ALBINO Trial (NCT03162653) investigates effects of very early postnatal allopurinol on neurocognitive outcome following perinatal asphyxia where prenatal informed consent (IC) is impossible. Ethically and legally, waiver of consent and/or deferred consent (DC) is acceptable in such an emergency. Short oral/two-step consent (SOC, brief information and oral consent followed by IC) has recently been investigated.

METHODS

Mixed-methods analysis of parental opinions on DC versus SOC in the context of neonatal asphyxia in a survey at two German centres. Prospective parents (ProP), parents of healthy newborns (PNeo) and parents of asphyxiated infants (PAx) born between 2006 and 2016 were invited.

RESULTS

108 of 422 parents participated (ProP:43; PNeo:35; PAx:30). Most parents trusted physicians, wanted preinterventional information and agreed that in emergencies interventions should begin immediately. Intergroup and intragroup variability existed for questions about DC and SOC. In the ALBINO Trial situation, 55% preferred SOC, and 26% reported DC without information might adversely affect their trust. Only 3% reported to potentially take legal action after DC. PAx were significantly more likely to support DC. PAx more frequently expressed positive emotions and appreciation for neonatal research. In open-ended questions, parents gave many constructive recommendations.

CONCLUSION

In this survey, parents expressed diverse opinions on consent, but the majority preferred SOC over DC. Parents who had experienced emergency admission of their asphyxiated neonates were more trusting. Obtaining parental perspectives is essential when designing studies, while being cognisant that these groups of parents may not represent the opinion of all parents.

Informed consent practices in clinical research: present and future

Clinical research must balance the need for ambitious recruitment with protecting participants' autonomy; a requirement of which is informed consent. Despite efforts to improve the informed consent process, participants are seldom provided sufficient information regarding research, hindering their ability to make informed decisions. These issues are particularly pervasive among patients experiencing acute illness or neurological impairment, both of which may impede their capacity to provide consent. There is a critical need to understand the components, requirements, and methods of obtaining true informed consent to achieve the vast numbers required for meaningful research. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the tenets underlying informed consent in research, including the assessment of capacity to consent, considerations for patients unable to consent, when to seek consent from substitute decision-makers, and consent under special circumstances. Various methods for obtaining informed consent are addressed, along with strategies for balancing recruitment and consent.

PARIST study protocol: a phase I/II randomised, controlled clinical trial to assess the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of paracetamol in resolving acute kidney injury in children with severe malaria

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) has in the past been considered a rare complication of malaria in children living in high-transmission settings. More recently, however, a growing number of paediatric case series of AKI in severe malaria studies in African children have been published (Artesunate vs Quinine in the Treatment of Severe P. falciparum Malaria in African children and Fluids Expansion as Supportive Therapy trials). The Paracetamol for Acute Renal Injury in Severe Malaria Trial (PARIST) therefore, aims to assess feasibility, safety and determine the effective dose of paracetamol, which attenuates nephrotoxicity of haemoproteins, red-cell free haemoglobin and myoglobin in children with haemoglobinuric severe malaria.

METHODS

PARIST is a phase I/II unblinded randomised controlled trial of 40 children aged >6 months and <12 years admitted with confirmed haemoglobinuric severe malaria (blackwater fever), a positive blood smear for P. falciparum malaria and either serum creatinine (Cr) increase by ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or to ≥1.5 times baseline and elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) >20 mg/dL. Children will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to paracetamol intervention dose arm (20 mg/kg orally 6-hourly for 48 hours) or to a control arm to receive standard of care for temperature control (ie, tepid sponging for 30 min if fever persists give rescue treatment). Primary outcome is renal recovery at 48 hours as indicated by stoppage of progression and decrease of Cr level below baseline, BUN (<20 mg/dL). Data analysis will be on the intention-to-treat principle and a per-protocol basis.Results from this phase I/II clinical trial will provide preliminary effectiveness data of this highly potential treatment for AKI in paediatric malaria (in particular for haemoglobinuric severe malaria) for a larger phase III trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical and regulatory approvals have been granted by the Mbale Hospital Institutional Ethics Review Committee (MRRH-REC OUT 002/2019), Uganda National Council of Science and Technology (UNCST-HS965ES) and the National drug Authority (NDA-CTC 0166/2021). We will be disseminating results through journals, conferences and policy briefs to policy makers and primary care providers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN84974248.

Clinical research for life-threatening illnesses requiring emergency hospitalisation: a critical interpretive synthesis of qualitative data related to the experience of participants and their caregivers

BACKGROUND

Research into life-threatening illnesses which require emergency hospitalisation is essential. This group of patients is unique in that they are experiencing an unfolding emergency when they are approached, enrolled, and followed up in a research study. We aimed to synthesise qualitative data from trial participants and surrogate decision-makers to deepen our understanding and inform the design and conduct of future clinical trials for life-threatening illnesses.

METHODS

We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis of qualitative data from trial participants and surrogate decision-makers related to the experience of participating in a clinical research study when suffering from a life-threatening illness. A scoping review informed a systematic review of published data. We searched research databases and reviewed papers for inclusion. Primary data and interpretations of data were extracted from each paper. Data were analysed using reciprocal translational analysis, refutational synthesis, and lines of argument synthesis to develop a synthetic construct.

RESULTS

Twenty-two papers were included. Most individuals had no previous knowledge or experience with clinical research. Individuals making decisions were directly experiencing or witness to an unfolding emergency which came with a myriad of physical and psychological symptoms. It was difficult to differentiate clinical research and routine care, and understanding of core concepts around research, particularly randomisation and equipoise, was limited. We found that this led to an underestimation of risk, an overestimation of benefit, and an expectation of being allocated to the intervention arm. The decision-making process was heavily influenced by trust in the research team. Individuals suggested that abbreviated information, presented in different ways and continuously throughout the research process, would have increased knowledge and satisfaction with the research process.

CONCLUSION

Individuals suffering from a life-threatening illness who are being invited to participate in clinical research need to be managed in a way that adapts to the severity of their illness and there is a need to tailor research processes, including informed consent, accordingly. We provide suggestions for further research and implementation work around research participation for individuals suffering from a life-threatening illness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020207296.

Facilitators and barriers for parental consent to pediatric emergency research

BACKGROUND

Obtaining informed consent for clinical research in the pediatric emergency department (ED) is challenging. Our objective was to understand the factors that influence parental consent for ED studies.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey assessing parents' willingness to enroll their children into an ED research study. Parents reporting a willingness to enroll in ED studies were presented with two hypothetical scenarios, a low-risk and a high-risk study, and then asked about decision influencers affecting consent. Parents expressing a lack of willingness to enroll were asked which decision influencers impacted their consent decision.

RESULTS

Among 118 parents, 90 (76%) stated they would be willing to enroll their child into an ED study; of these, 86 (96%) would consent for a low-risk study and 54 (60%) would consent for a high-risk study. Caucasian parents, and those with previous research exposure, were more likely to report willingness to participate. Those who would consent to the high-risk study cited "benefits that research would provide to future children" most strongly influenced their decision to agree.

CONCLUSIONS

ED investigators should highlight the benefits for future children and inquire about parents' previous exposure to research to enhance ED research enrollment. Barriers to consent in non-Caucasian families should be further investigated.

IMPACT

Obtaining consent for pediatric emergency research is challenging and this study identified factors influencing parental consent for research in EDs. Benefits for future children and parents' previous research experience were two of the most influential factors in parents' willingness to consent to ED research studies. These findings will help to improve enrollment in ED research studies and better our understanding of how to promote the health and well-being of pediatric patients.

The ethical considerations for emergency care research in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review of the published literature

INTRODUCTION

Research studies on emergency care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face many ethical considerations, including obtaining valid informed consent from vulnerable patients. This study aims to describe the body of literature related to the ethical considerations associated with emergency care research in low- and middle-income settings.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify literature published between 2000 and 2020 related to ethical considerations associated with emergency care research in the LMIC setting. Titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate, and full texts were reviewed and extracted by the principal author.

RESULTS

In total, 1087 articles were identified and 17 articles were included. Major themes identified in the literature included risk versus benefit assessments, patient vulnerabilities, consent, community engagement, clinical roles, ancillary care provision, and regulation of research. Alternative models of consent are often used in emergency care research, including surrogate consent, community consent, and waiver of consent. Challenges and best practices with these alternative models of consent in LMICs are discussed.

DISCUSSION

Gaps remain in the literature describing the ethics of emergency care research in LMICs, including clear guidelines for protecting vulnerable patients and designing ethical consent processes. Best practices identified include community engagement for designing research studies, identifying acceptable risk profiles, and allocating benefits. Continuous and rigorous assessment of the quality of consent is also needed.

Model for developing context-sensitive responses to vulnerability in research: managing ethical dilemmas faced by frontline research staff in Kenya

Health research in low-resource settings often involves individuals and populations defined as 'vulnerable'. There is growing attention in the literature to the ethical dilemmas that frontline research staff face while conducting such research. However, there is little documented as to how research staff might support one another in identifying and handling these dilemmas in different contexts. Over the course of conducting empirical ethics research embedded in the Childhood Acute Illness & Nutrition Network, we developed an approach to examine and respond to the ethical issues and dilemmas faced by the study teams, particularly frontline staff. In this paper we describe the specific tools and approach we developed, which centred on regular cross-team ethics reflection sessions, and share lessons learnt. We suggest that all studies involving potentially vulnerable participants should incorporate activities and processes to support frontline staff in identifying, reflecting on and responding to ethical dilemmas, throughout studies. We outline the resources needed to do this and share piloted tools for further adaptation and evaluation. Such initiatives should complement and feed into-and certainly not in any way replace or substitute for-strong institutional ethics review, safeguarding and health and safety policies and processes, as well broader staff training and career support initiatives.

Vulnerability, Agency, and the Research Encounter: Family Members' Experiences and Perceptions of Participating in an Observational Clinical Study in Kenya

Pediatric clinical research in low-resourced countries involves individuals defined as "vulnerable" in research ethics guidance. Insights from research participants can strengthen the design and oversight of studies. We share family members' perspectives and experiences of an observational clinical study conducted in one Kenyan hospital as part of an integrated empirical ethics study. Employing qualitative methods, we explored how research encounters featured in family members' care-seeking journeys. Our data reveals that children's vulnerability is intricately interwoven with that of their families, and that research processes and procedures can inadvertently add to hidden burdens for families. In research, the potential for layered and intersecting situational and structural vulnerability should be considered, and participants' agency in constrained research contexts actively recognized and protected.

Observational study of parental opinion of deferred consent for neonatal research

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the opinions of parents of newborns following their infant's enrolment into a neonatal research study through the process of deferred consent.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods, observational study, interviewing 100 parents recently approached for deferred consent.

SETTING

Tertiary-level neonatal intensive care unit, Melbourne, Australia.

RESULTS

All 100 parents interviewed had consented to the study/studies using deferred consent; 62% had also experienced a prospective neonatal consent process. Eighty-nine per cent were 'satisfied' with the deferred consent process. The most common reason given for consenting was 'to help future babies'. Negative comments regarding deferred consent mostly related to the timing of the consent approach, and some related to a perceived loss of parental rights. A deferred approach was preferred by 51%, 24% preferred a prospective approach and 25% were unsure. Those who thought prospective consent would not have been preferable cited impaired decision-making, inappropriate timing of an approach before birth and their preference for removal of the decision-making burden via deferred consent. Seventy-seven per cent thought they would have given the same response if approached prospectively; those who would have declined reported that a prospective approach under stressful conditions was unwelcome and too overwhelming.

CONCLUSION

In our sample, 89% of parents of infants enrolled in neonatal research using deferred consent considered it acceptable and half would not have preferred prospective consent. The ability to make a more considered decision under less stressful circumstances was key to the acceptability of deferred consent.

Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study.

DESIGN

Mixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial.

SETTING

English, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs).

PARTICIPANTS

(1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al's theoretical framework of acceptability.

RESULTS

There was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818.

Barriers and Facilitators to Obtaining Informed Consent in a Critical Care Pediatric Research Ward in Southern Malawi

Informed consent is an ethical requirement in clinical research. Obtaining informed consent is challenging in resource-constrained settings. We report results of a formative qualitative study that examined factors that facilitate and hinder informed consent for clinical research among critically ill children in Malawi. We argue that truly informed consent in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is challenged by parental distress, time constraints when balancing care for critically ill patients with research-related tasks, and social hierarchies and community mistrust toward certain research procedures. We interviewed health care providers and parents of children attending a critical care unit to identify potential challenges and solicit strategies for addressing them. Providers and caregivers suggested practical solutions to enhance research participant understanding of clinical trial research, including the use of visual materials, community engagement strategies, and using patients as advocates in promoting understanding of research procedures.

Different temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever due to infection: the FEVER feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Fever accelerates host immune system control of pathogens but at a high metabolic cost. The optimal approach to fever management and the optimal temperature thresholds used for treatment in critically ill children are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different temperature thresholds for antipyretic management.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods feasibility study comprising three linked studies - (1) a qualitative study exploring parent and clinician views, (2) an observational study of the epidemiology of fever in children with infection in paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) and (3) a pilot RCT with an integrated-perspectives study.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from (1) four hospitals in England via social media (for the FEVER qualitative study), (2) 22 PICUs in the UK (for the FEVER observational study) and (3) four PICUs in England (for the FEVER pilot RCT).

PARTICIPANTS

(1) Parents of children with relevant experience were recruited to the FEVER qualitative study, (2) patients who were unplanned admissions to PICUs were recruited to the FEVER observational study and (3) children admitted with infection requiring mechanical ventilation were recruited to the FEVER pilot RCT. Parents of children and clinicians involved in the pilot RCT.

INTERVENTIONS

The FEVER qualitative study and the FEVER observational study had no interventions. In the FEVER pilot RCT, children were randomly allocated (1 : 1) using research without prior consent (RWPC) to permissive (39.5 °C) or restrictive (37.5 °C) temperature thresholds for antipyretics during their PICU stay while mechanically ventilated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) The acceptability of FEVER, RWPC and potential outcomes (in the FEVER qualitative study), (2) the size of the potentially eligible population and the temperature thresholds used (in the FEVER observational study) and (3) recruitment and retention rates, protocol adherence and separation between groups and distribution of potential outcomes (in the FEVER pilot RCT).

RESULTS

In the FEVER qualitative study, 25 parents were interviewed and 56 clinicians took part in focus groups. Both the parents and the clinicians found the study acceptable. Clinicians raised concerns regarding temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain/discomfort. In the FEVER observational study, 1853 children with unplanned admissions and infection were admitted to 22 PICUs between March and August 2017. The recruitment rate was 10.9 per site per month. The majority of critically ill children with a maximum temperature of > 37.5 °C received antipyretics. In the FEVER pilot RCT, 100 eligible patients were randomised between September and December 2017 at a recruitment rate of 11.1 per site per month. Consent was provided for 49 out of 51 participants in the restrictive temperature group, but only for 38 out of 49 participants in the permissive temperature group. A separation of 0.5 °C (95% confidence interval 0.2 °C to 0.8 °C) between groups was achieved. A high completeness of outcome measures was achieved. Sixty parents of 57 children took part in interviews and/or completed questionnaires and 98 clinicians took part in focus groups or completed a survey. Parents and clinicians found the pilot RCT and RWPC acceptable. Concerns about children being in pain/discomfort were cited as reasons for withdrawal and non-consent by parents and non-adherence to the protocol by clinicians.

LIMITATIONS

Different recruitment periods for observational and pilot studies may not fully reflect the population that is eligible for a definitive RCT.

CONCLUSIONS

The results identified barriers to delivering the definitive FEVER RCT, including acceptability of the permissive temperature threshold. The findings also provided insight into how these barriers may be overcome, such as by limiting the patient inclusion criteria to invasive ventilation only and by improved site training. A definitive FEVER RCT using a modified protocol should be conducted, but further work is required to agree important outcome measures for clinical trials among critically ill children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The FEVER observational study is registered as NCT03028818 and the FEVER pilot RCT is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16022198.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Deferred consent for delivery room studies: the providers' perspective

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight into neonatal care providers' perceptions of deferred consent for delivery room (DR) studies in actual scenarios.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 46 neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) staff members of the Leiden University Medical Center (the Netherlands) and the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (USA). At the time interviews were conducted, both NICUs conducted the same DR studies, but differed in their consent approaches. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the qualitative data analysis software Atlas.ti V.7.0.

RESULTS

Although providers reported to regard the prospective consent approach as the most preferable consent approach, they acknowledged that a deferred consent approach is needed for high-quality DR management. However, providers reported concerns about parental autonomy, approaching parents for consent and ethical review of study protocols that include a deferred consent approach. Providers furthermore differed in perceived appropriateness of a deferred consent approach for the studies that were being conducted at their NICUs. Providers with first-hand experience with deferred consent reported positive experiences that they attributed to appropriate communication and timing of approaching parents for consent.

CONCLUSION

Insight into providers' perceptions of deferred consent for DR studies in actual scenarios suggests that a deferred consent approach is considered acceptable, but that actual usage of the approach for DR studies can be improved on.

Routine gastric residual volume measurement to guide enteral feeding in mechanically ventilated infants and children: the GASTRIC feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide the initiation and delivery of enteral feeding is widespread in paediatric intensive care and neonatal units, but has little underlying evidence to support it.

OBJECTIVE

To answer the question: is a trial of no gastric residual volume measurement feasible in UK paediatric intensive care units and neonatal units?

DESIGN

A mixed-methods study involving five linked work packages in two parallel arms: neonatal units and paediatric intensive care units. Work package 1: a survey of units to establish current UK practice. Work package 2: qualitative interviews with health-care professionals and caregivers of children admitted to either setting. Work package 3: a modified two-round e-Delphi survey to investigate health-care professionals' opinions on trial design issues and to obtain consensus on outcomes. Work package 4: examination of national databases to determine the potential eligible populations. Work package 5: two consensus meetings of health-care professionals and parents to review the data and agree consensus on outcomes that had not reached consensus in the e-Delphi study.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Parents of children with experience of ventilation and tube feeding in both neonatal units and paediatric intensive care units, and health-care professionals working in neonatal units and paediatric intensive care units.

RESULTS

Baseline surveys showed that the practice of gastric residual volume measurement was very common (96% in paediatric intensive care units and 65% in neonatal units). Ninety per cent of parents from both neonatal units and paediatric intensive care units supported a future trial, while highlighting concerns around possible delays in detecting complications. Health-care professionals also indicated that a trial was feasible, with 84% of staff willing to participate in a trial. Concerns expressed by junior nurses about the intervention arm of not measuring gastric residual volumes were addressed by developing a simple flow chart and education package. The trial design survey and e-Delphi study gained consensus on 12 paediatric intensive care unit and nine neonatal unit outcome measures, and identified acceptable inclusion and exclusion criteria. Given the differences in physiology, disease processes, environments, staffing and outcomes of interest, two different trials are required in the two settings. Database analyses subsequently showed that trials were feasible in both settings in terms of patient numbers. Of 16,222 children who met the inclusion criteria in paediatric intensive care units, 12,629 stayed for > 3 days. In neonatal units, 15,375 neonates < 32 weeks of age met the inclusion criteria. Finally, the two consensus meetings demonstrated 'buy-in' from the wider UK neonatal communities and paediatric intensive care units, and enabled us to discuss and vote on the outcomes that did not achieve consensus in the e-Delphi study.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Two separate UK trials (one in neonatal units and one in paediatric intensive care units) are feasible to conduct, but they cannot be combined as a result of differences in outcome measures and treatment protocols, reflecting the distinctness of the two specialties.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42110505.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A Formative Qualitative Study on the Acceptability of Deferred Consent in Adult Emergency Care Research in Malawi

Research in emergency medical care is challenging due to a limited therapeutic window for intervention, which may compromise informed consent. "Deferred consent" allows initiation of study procedures before full consent is recorded. We conducted a formative qualitative study exploring perspectives on deferred consent in Malawi among research ethics committee members, health care professionals, and lay representatives. Participants identified several advantages of deferred consent including scientific value and potential health benefits to the study subjects and wider population. Participants also had concerns, including regulatory barriers and the risk of abuse and malpractice. Conditions affecting acceptability are related to the role of proxies, the nature of the research, the availability of robust regulatory oversight, and the need for community engagement. Our findings show deferred consent would be acceptable in Malawi, provided that a clear case can be made to advance medical knowledge and that adequate regulatory and ethical protections are in place.

Emergency care research ethics in low-income and middle-income countries

A large proportion of the total global burden of disease is caused by emergency medical conditions. Emergency care research is essential to improving emergency medicine but this research can raise some distinctive ethical challenges, especially with regard to (1) standard of care and risk-benefit assessment; (2) blurring of the roles of clinician and researcher; (3) enrolment of populations with intersecting vulnerabilities; (4) fair participant selection; (5) quality of consent; and (6) community engagement. Despite the importance of research to improve emergency care in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and the widely acknowledged ethical challenges, very little has been written on the ethics of emergency care research in LMICs. This paper examines the ethical and regulatory challenges to conducting emergency care research with human participants in LMICs. We outline key challenges, present potential solutions or frameworks for addressing these challenges, and identify gaps. Despite the ethical and regulatory challenges, conducting high-quality, ethical emergency care research in LMICs is possible and it is essential for global health.

Restricted fluid bolus volume in early septic shock: results of the Fluids in Shock pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility of Fluids in Shock, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of restricted fluid bolus volume (10 mL/kg) versus recommended practice (20 mL/kg).

DESIGN

Nine-month pilot RCT with embedded mixed-method perspectives study.

SETTING

13 hospitals in England.

PATIENTS

Children presenting to emergency departments with suspected infection and shock after 20 mL/kg fluid.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to further 10 or 20 mL/kg fluid boluses every 15 min for up to 4 hours if still in shock.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

These were based on progression criteria, including recruitment and retention, protocol adherence, separation, potential trial outcome measures, and parent and staff perspectives.

RESULTS

Seventy-five participants were randomised; two were withdrawn. 23 (59%) of 39 in the 10 mL/kg arm and 25 (74%) of 34 in the 20 mL/kg arm required a single trial bolus before the shock resolved. 79% of boluses were delivered per protocol in the 10 mL/kg arm and 55% in the 20 mL/kg arm. The volume of study bolus fluid after 4 hours was 44% lower in the 10 mL/kg group (mean 14.5 vs 27.5 mL/kg). The Paediatric Index of Mortality-2 score was 2.1 (IQR 1.6-2.7) in the 10 mL/kg group and 2.0 (IQR 1.6-2.5) in the 20 mL/kg group. There were no deaths. Length of hospital stay, paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admissions and PICU-free days at 30 days did not differ significantly between the groups. In the perspectives study, the trial was generally supported, although some problems with protocol adherence were described.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants were not as unwell as expected. A larger trial is not feasible in its current design in the UK.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN15244462.

Restricted fluid bolus versus current practice in children with septic shock: the FiSh feasibility study and pilot RCT

BACKGROUND

There has been no randomised controlled trial (RCT) of fluid bolus therapy in paediatric sepsis in the developed world despite evidence that excess fluid may be associated with harm.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the feasibility of the Fluids in Shock (FiSh) trial - a RCT comparing restricted fluid bolus (10 ml/kg) with current practice (20 ml/kg) in children with septic shock in the UK.

DESIGN

(1) Qualitative feasibility study exploring parents' views about the pilot RCT. (2) Pilot RCT over a 9-month period, including integrated parental and staff perspectives study.

SETTING

(1) Recruitment took place across four NHS hospitals in England and on social media. (2) Recruitment took place across 13 NHS hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

(1) Parents of children admitted to a UK hospital with presumed septic shock in the previous 3 years. (2) Children presenting to an emergency department with clinical suspicion of infection and shock after 20 ml/kg of fluid. Exclusion criteria were receipt of > 20 ml/kg of fluid, conditions requiring fluid restriction and the patient not for full active treatment (i.e. palliative care plan in place). Site staff and parents of children in the pilot were recruited to the perspectives study.

INTERVENTIONS

(1) None. (2) Children were randomly allocated (1 : 1) to 10- or 20-ml/kg fluid boluses every 15 minutes for 4 hours if in shock.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) Acceptability of FiSh trial, proposed consent model and potential outcome measures. (2) Outcomes were based on progression criteria, including recruitment and retention rates, protocol adherence and separation between the groups, and collection and distribution of potential outcome measures.

RESULTS

(1) Twenty-one parents were interviewed. All would have consented for the pilot study. (2) Seventy-five children were randomised, 40 to the 10-ml/kg fluid bolus group and 35 to the 20-ml/kg fluid bolus group. Two children were withdrawn. Although the anticipated recruitment rate was achieved, there was variability across the sites. Fifty-nine per cent of children in the 10-ml/kg fluid bolus group and 74% in the 20-ml/kg fluid bolus group required only a single trial bolus before shock resolved. The volume of fluid (in ml/kg) was 35% lower in the first hour and 44% lower over the 4-hour period in the 10-ml/kg fluid bolus group. Fluid boluses were delivered per protocol (volume and timing) for 79% of participants in the 10-ml/kg fluid bolus group and for 55% in the 20-ml/kg fluid bolus group, mainly as a result of delivery not being completed within 15 minutes. There were no deaths. Length of hospital stay, paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) transfers, and days alive and PICU free did not differ significantly between the groups. Two adverse events were reported in each group. A questionnaire was completed by 45 parents, 20 families and seven staff were interviewed and 20 staff participated in focus groups. Although a minority of site staff lacked equipoise in favour of more restricted boluses, all supported the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though a successful feasibility and pilot RCT were conducted, participants were not as unwell as expected. A larger trial is not feasible in its current design in the UK.

FUTURE WORK

Further observational work is required to determine the epidemiology of severe childhood infection in the UK in the postvaccine era.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15244462.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A comprehensive systematic review of stakeholder attitudes to alternatives to prospective informed consent in paediatric acute care research

BACKGROUND

A challenge of performing research in the paediatric emergency and acute care setting is obtaining valid prospective informed consent from parents. The ethical issues are complex, and it is important to consider the perspective of participants, health care workers and researchers on research without prospective informed consent while planning this type of research.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines, of empirical evidence relating to the process, experiences and acceptability of alternatives to prospective informed consent, in the paediatric emergency or acute care setting. Major medical databases and grey sources were searched and results were screened and assessed against eligibility criteria by 2 authors, and full text articles of relevant studies obtained. Data were extracted onto data collection forms and imported into data management software for analysis.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the review consisting of nine full text articles and four abstracts. Given the heterogeneity of the methods, results could not be quantitatively combined for meta-analysis, and qualitative results are presented in narrative form, according to themes identified from the data. Major themes include capacity of parents to provide informed consent, feasibility of informed consent, support for alternatives to informed consent, process issues, modified consent process, child death, and community consultation.

CONCLUSION

Our review demonstrated that children, their families, and health care staff recognise the requirement for research without prior consent, and are generally supportive of enrolling children in such research with the provisions of limiting risk, and informing parents as soon as possible. Australian data and perspectives of children are lacking and represent important knowledge gaps.

A qualitative feasibility study to inform a randomised controlled trial of fluid bolus therapy in septic shock

OBJECTIVE

The Fluids in Shock (FiSh) Trial proposes to evaluate whether restrictive fluid bolus therapy (10 mL/kg) is more beneficial than current recommended practice (20 mL/kg) in the resuscitation of children with septic shock in the UK. This qualitative feasibility study aimed to explore acceptability of the FiSh Trial, including research without prior consent (RWPC), potential barriers to recruitment and participant information for a pilot trial.

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study involving parents of children who had presented to a UK emergency department or been admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit with severe infection in the previous 3 years.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one parents (seven bereaved) were interviewed 16 (median) months since their child's hospital admission (range: 1-41).

RESULTS

All parents said they would have provided consent for the use of their child's data in the FiSh Trial. The majority were unfamiliar with RWPC, yet supported its use. Parents were initially concerned about the change from currently recommended treatment, yet were reassured by explanations of the current evidence base, fluid bolus therapy and monitoring procedures. Parents made recommendations about the timing of the research discussion and content of participant information. Bereaved parents stated that recruiters should not discuss research immediately after a child's death, but supported a personalised postal 'opt-out' approach to consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings show that parents whose child has experienced severe infection supported the proposed FiSh Trial, including the use of RWPC. Parents' views informed the development of the pilot trial protocol and site staff training.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN15244462-results.

Qualitative evaluation of a deferred consent process in paediatric emergency research: a PREDICT study

BACKGROUND

A challenge of conducting research in critically ill children is that the therapeutic window for the intervention may be too short to seek informed consent prior to enrolment. In specific circumstances, most international ethical guidelines allow for children to be enrolled in research with informed consent obtained later, termed deferred consent (DC) or retrospective consent. There is a paucity of data on the attitudes of parents to this method of enrolment in paediatric emergency research.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the attitudes of parents to the concept of DC and to expand the knowledge of the limitations to informed consent and DC in these situations.

METHOD

Children presenting with uncomplicated febrile seizures or bronchiolitis were identified from three separate hospital emergency department databases. Parents were invited to participate in a semistructured telephone interview exploring themes of limitations of prospective informed consent, acceptability of the DC process and the most appropriate time to seek DC. Transcripts underwent inductive thematic analysis with intercoder agreement, using Nvivo 11 software.

RESULTS

A total of 39 interviews were conducted. Participants comprehended the limitations of informed consent under emergency circumstances and were generally supportive of DC. However, they frequently confused concepts of clinical care and research, and support for participation was commonly linked to their belief of personal benefit.

CONCLUSION

Participants acknowledged the requirement for alternatives to prospective informed consent in emergency research, and were supportive of the concept of DC. Our results suggest that current research practice seems to align with community expectations.

Comparison of Consent Models in a Randomized Trial of Corticosteroids in Pediatric Septic Shock

OBJECTIVES

To describe the use of deferred and prior informed consent models in the context of a low additional risk to standard of care, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial of corticosteroids in pediatric septic shock.

DESIGN

An observational substudy of consent processes in a randomized controlled trial of hydrocortisone versus placebo.

SETTING

Seven tertiary level PICUs in Canada.

PATIENTS

Children newborn to 17 years inclusive admitted to PICU with suspected septic shock between July 2014 and March 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Information on the number of families approached, consent rates obtained, and spontaneously volunteered reasons for nonparticipation were collected for both deferred and informed consent. The research ethics board of five of seven centers approved a deferred consent model; however, implementation criteria for use of this model varied across sites. The consent rate using deferred versus prior informed consent was significantly higher (83%; 35/42 vs 58%; 15/26; p = 0.02). The mean times from meeting inclusion criteria to randomization (1.8 ± 1.8 vs 3.6 ± 2.1 hr; p = 0.007) and study drug administration (3.4 ± 2.7 hr vs 4.8 ± 2.1 hr; p = 0.05) were significantly shorter with the use of deferred consent versus prior informed consent. No family member or research ethics board expressed concern following use of deferred consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferred consent was acceptable in time-sensitive critical care research to most research ethics boards, families, and healthcare providers and resulted in higher consent rates and more efficient recruitment. Larger studies on deferred consent and consistency interpreting jurisdictional guidelines are needed to advance pediatric acute care.

The intensive care medicine clinical research agenda in paediatrics

BACKGROUND

Intensive Care Medicine set us the task of outlining a global clinical research agenda for paediatric intensive care (PIC). In line with the clinical focus of this journal, we have limited this to research that may directly influence patient care.

METHODS

Clinician researchers from PIC research networks of varying degrees of formality from around the world were invited to answer two main questions: (1) What have been the major recent advances in paediatric critical care research? (2) What are the top 10 studies for the next 10 years?

RESULTS

(1) Inclusive databases are well established in many countries. These registries allow detailed observational studies and feasibility testing of clinical trial protocols. Recent trials are larger and more valuable, and (2) most common interventions in PIC are not evidenced-based. Clinical studies for the next 10 years should address this deficit, including: ventilation techniques and interfaces; fluid, transfusion and feeding strategies; optimal targets for vital signs; multiple organ failure definitions, mechanisms and treatments; trauma, prevention and treatment; improving safety; comfort of the patient and their family; appropriate care in the face of medical complexity; defining post-PICU outcomes; and improving knowledge generation and adoption, with novel trial design and implementation strategies. The group specifically highlighted the need for research in resource-limited environments wherein mortality remains often tenfold higher than in well-resourced settings.

CONCLUSION

Paediatric intensive care research has never been healthier, but many gaps in knowledge remain. We need to close these urgently. The impact of new knowledge will be greatest in resource-limited environments.

Gastroenteritis Aggressive Versus Slow Treatment For Rehydration (GASTRO). A pilot rehydration study for severe dehydration: WHO plan C versus slower rehydration

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) rehydration management guidelines (Plan C) for children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) and severe dehydration are widely practiced in resource-poor settings, yet have never been formally evaluated in a clinical trial. A recent audit of outcome of AGE at Kilifi County Hospital, Kenya noted that 10% of children required high dependency care (20% mortality) and a number developed fluid-related complications. The fluid resuscitation trial, FEAST, conducted in African children with severe febrile illness, demonstrated higher mortality with fluid bolus therapy and raised concerns regarding the safety of rapid intravenous rehydration therapy. Those findings warrant a detailed physiological study of children’s responses to rehydration therapy incorporating quantification of myocardial performance and haemodynamic changes. 

Methods: GASTRO is a multi-centre, unblinded Phase II randomised controlled trial of 120 children aged 2 months to 12 years admitted to hospital with severe dehydration secondary to AGE. Children with severe malnutrition, chronic diarrhoea and congenital/rheumatic heart disease are excluded. Children will be enrolled over 18 months in 3 centres in Kenya and Uganda and followed until 7 days post-discharge. The trial will randomise children 1:1 to standard rapid rehydration using Ringers Lactate  (WHO plan ‘C’ – 100mls/kg over 3-6 hours according to age, plus additional 0.9% saline boluses for children presenting in shock) or to a slower rehydration regimen (100mls/kg given over 8 hours and without the addition of fluid boluses). Enrolment started in November 2016 and is on-going. Primary outcome is frequency of adverse events, particularly related to cardiovascular compromise and neurological sequelae.  Secondary outcomes focus on clinical, biochemical, and physiological measures related to assessment of severity of dehydration, and response to treatment by intravenous rehydration.

Discussion: Results from this pilot will contribute to generating robust definitions of outcomes (in particular for non-mortality endpoints) for a larger Phase III trial.

Written versus verbal consent: a qualitative study of stakeholder views of consent procedures used at the time of recruitment into a peripartum trial conducted in an emergency setting

BACKGROUND

Obtaining prospective written consent from women to participate in trials when they are experiencing an obstetric emergency is challenging. Alternative consent pathways, such as gaining verbal consent at enrolment followed, later, by obtaining written consent, have been advocated by some clinicians and bioethicists but have received little empirical attention. We explored women's and staff views about the consent procedures used during the internal pilot of a trial (GOT-IT), where the protocol permitted staff to gain verbal consent at recruitment.

METHODS

Interviews with staff (n = 27) and participating women (n = 22). Data were analysed thematically and interviews were cross-compared to identify differences and similarities in participants' views about the consent procedures used.

RESULTS

Women and some staff highlighted benefits to obtaining verbal consent at trial enrolment, including expediting recruitment and reducing the burden on those left exhausted by their births. However, most staff with direct responsibility for taking consent expressed extreme reluctance to proceed with enrolment until they had obtained written consent, despite being comfortable using verbal procedures in their clinical practice. To account for this resistance, staff drew a strong distinction between research and clinical care and suggested that a higher level of consent was needed when recruiting into trials. In doing so, staff emphasised the need to engage women in reflexive decision-making and highlighted the role that completing the consent form could play in enabling and evidencing this process. While most staff cited their ethical responsibilities to women, they also voiced concerns that the absence of a signed consent form at recruitment could expose them to greater risk of litigation were an individual to experience a complication during the trial. Inexperience of recruiting into peripartum trials and limited availability of staff trained to take consent also reinforced preferences for obtaining written consent at recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

While alternative consent pathways have an important role to play in advancing emergency medicine research, and may be appreciated by potential recruits, they may give rise to unintended ethical and logistical challenges for staff. Staff would benefit from training and support to increase their confidence and willingness to recruit into trials using alternative consent pathways.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This qualitative research was undertaken as part of the GOT-IT Trial (trial registration number: ISCRTN 88609453 ). Date of registration 26/03/2014.

CATheter Infections in CHildren (CATCH): a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation comparing impregnated and standard central venous catheters in children

BACKGROUND

Impregnated central venous catheters (CVCs) are recommended for adults to reduce bloodstream infection (BSI) but not for children.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of impregnated compared with standard CVCs for reducing BSI in children admitted for intensive care.

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised controlled trial, cost-effectiveness analysis from a NHS perspective and a generalisability analysis and cost impact analysis.

SETTING

14 English paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Children aged < 16 years admitted to a PICU and expected to require a CVC for ≥ 3 days.

INTERVENTIONS

Heparin-bonded, antibiotic-impregnated (rifampicin and minocycline) or standard polyurethane CVCs, allocated randomly (1 : 1 : 1). The intervention was blinded to all but inserting clinicians.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Time to first BSI sampled between 48 hours after randomisation and 48 hours after CVC removal. The following data were used in the trial: trial case report forms; hospital administrative data for 6 months pre and post randomisation; and national-linked PICU audit and laboratory data.

RESULTS

In total, 1859 children were randomised, of whom 501 were randomised prospectively and 1358 were randomised as an emergency; of these, 984 subsequently provided deferred consent for follow-up. Clinical effectiveness - BSIs occurred in 3.59% (18/502) of children randomised to standard CVCs, 1.44% (7/486) of children randomised to antibiotic CVCs and 3.42% (17/497) of children randomised to heparin CVCs. Primary analyses comparing impregnated (antibiotic and heparin CVCs) with standard CVCs showed no effect of impregnated CVCs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 1.34]. Secondary analyses showed that antibiotic CVCs were superior to standard CVCs (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.96) but heparin CVCs were not (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.03). Time to thrombosis, mortality by 30 days and minocycline/rifampicin resistance did not differ by CVC. Cost-effectiveness - heparin CVCs were not clinically effective and therefore were not cost-effective. The incremental cost of antibiotic CVCs compared with standard CVCs over a 6-month time horizon was £1160 (95% CI -£4743 to £6962), with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £54,057 per BSI avoided. There was considerable uncertainty in costs: antibiotic CVCs had a probability of 0.35 of being dominant. Based on index hospital stay costs only, antibiotic CVCs were associated with a saving of £97,543 per BSI averted. The estimated value of health-care resources associated with each BSI was £10,975 (95% CI -£2801 to £24,751). Generalisability and cost-impact - the baseline risk of BSI in 2012 for PICUs in England was 4.58 (95% CI 4.42 to 4.74) per 1000 bed-days. An estimated 232 BSIs could have been averted in 2012 using antibiotic CVCs. The additional cost of purchasing antibiotic CVCs for all children who require them (£36 per CVC) would be less than the value of resources associated with managing BSIs in PICUs with standard BSI rates of > 1.2 per 1000 CVC-days.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary outcome did not differ between impregnated and standard CVCs. However, antibiotic-impregnated CVCs significantly reduced the risk of BSI compared with standard and heparin CVCs. Adoption of antibiotic-impregnated CVCs could be beneficial even for PICUs with low BSI rates, although uncertainty remains whether or not they represent value for money to the NHS. Limitations - inserting clinicians were not blinded to allocation and a lower than expected event rate meant that there was limited power for head-to-head comparisons of each type of impregnation. Future work - adoption of impregnated CVCs in PICUs should be considered and could be monitored through linkage of electronic health-care data and clinical data on CVC use with laboratory surveillance data on BSI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01029717.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exploring the experiences of substitute decision-makers with an exception to consent in a paediatric resuscitation randomised controlled trial: study protocol for a qualitative research study

INTRODUCTION

Prospective informed consent is required for most research involving human participants; however, this is impracticable under some circumstances. The Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS) outlines the requirements for research involving human participants in Canada. The need for an exception to consent (deferred consent) is recognised and endorsed in the TCPS for research in individual medical emergencies; however, little is known about substitute decision-maker (SDM) experiences. A paediatric resuscitation trial (SQUEEZE) (NCT01973907) using an exception to consent process began enrolling at McMaster Children's Hospital in January 2014. This qualitative research study aims to generate new knowledge on SDM experiences with the exception to consent process as implemented in a randomised controlled trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The SDMs of children enrolled into the SQUEEZE pilot trial will be the sampling frame from which ethics study participants will be derived.

DESIGN

Qualitative research study involving individual interviews and grounded theory methodology.

PARTICIPANTS

SDMs for children enrolled into the SQUEEZE pilot trial.

SAMPLE SIZE

Up to 25 SDMs. Qualitative methodology: SDMs will be invited to participate in the qualitative ethics study. Interviews with consenting SDMs will be conducted in person or by telephone, taped and professionally transcribed. Participants will be encouraged to elaborate on their experience of being asked to consent after the fact and how this process occurred.

ANALYSIS

Data gathering and analysis will be undertaken simultaneously. The investigators will collaborate in developing the coding scheme, and data will be coded using NVivo. Emerging themes will be identified.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This research represents a rare opportunity to interview parents/guardians of critically ill children enrolled into a resuscitation trial without their knowledge or prior consent. Findings will inform implementation of the exception to consent process in the planned definitive SQUEEZE trial and support development of evidence-based ethics guidelines.

Transfusion and Treatment of severe anaemia in African children (TRACT): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In sub-Saharan Africa, where infectious diseases and nutritional deficiencies are common, severe anaemia is a common cause of paediatric hospital admission, yet the evidence to support current treatment recommendations is limited. To avert overuse of blood products, the World Health Organisation advocates a conservative transfusion policy and recommends iron, folate and anti-helminthics at discharge. Outcomes are unsatisfactory with high rates of in-hospital mortality (9-10%), 6-month mortality and relapse (6%). A definitive trial to establish best transfusion and treatment strategies to prevent both early and delayed mortality and relapse is warranted.

METHODS/DESIGN

TRACT is a multicentre randomised controlled trial of 3954 children aged 2 months to 12 years admitted to hospital with severe anaemia (haemoglobin < 6 g/dl). Children will be enrolled over 2 years in 4 centres in Uganda and Malawi and followed for 6 months. The trial will simultaneously evaluate (in a factorial trial with a 3 x 2 x 2 design) 3 ways to reduce short-term and longer-term mortality and morbidity following admission to hospital with severe anaemia in African children. The trial will compare: (i) R1: liberal transfusion (30 ml/kg whole blood) versus conservative transfusion (20 ml/kg) versus no transfusion (control). The control is only for children with uncomplicated severe anaemia (haemoglobin 4-6 g/dl); (ii) R2: post-discharge multi-vitamin multi-mineral supplementation (including folate and iron) versus routine care (folate and iron) for 3 months; (iii) R3: post-discharge cotrimoxazole prophylaxis for 3 months versus no prophylaxis. All randomisations are open. Enrolment to the trial started September 2014 and is currently ongoing. Primary outcome is cumulative mortality to 4 weeks for the transfusion strategy comparisons, and to 6 months for the nutritional support/antibiotic prophylaxis comparisons. Secondary outcomes include mortality, morbidity (haematological correction, nutritional and infectious), safety and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

If confirmed by the trial, a cheap and widely available 'bundle' of effective interventions, directed at immediate and downstream consequences of severe anaemia, could lead to substantial reductions in mortality in a substantial number of African children hospitalised with severe anaemia every year, if widely implemented.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN84086586 , Approved 11 February 2013.

Taking the bull by the horns: Ethical considerations in the design and implementation of an Ebola virus therapy trial

Ebola virus is categorized as one of the most dangerous pathogens in the world. Although there is no known cure for Ebola virus, there is some evidence that the severity of the disease can be curtailed using plasma from survivors. Although there is a general consensus on the importance of research, methodological and ethical challenges for conducting research in an emergency situation have been identified. Performing clinical trials is important, especially for health conditions that are of public health significance (including rare epidemics) to develop new therapies as well as to test the efficacy and effectiveness of new interventions. However, routine clinical trial procedures can be difficult to apply in emergency public health crises hence require a consideration of alternative approaches on how therapies in these situations are tested and brought to the market. This paper examines some of the ethical issues that arise when conducting clinical trials during a highly dangerous pathogen outbreak, with a special focus on the Ebola virus outbreak in West Africa. The issues presented here come from a review of a protocol that was submitted to the Global Emerging Pathogens Treatment Consortium (GET). In reviewing the proposal, which was about conducting a clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using convalescent plasma in the management of Ebola virus disease, the authors deliberated on various issues, which were documented as minutes and later used as a basis for this paper. The experiences and reflections shared by the authors, who came from different regions and disciplines across Africa, present wide-ranging perspectives on the conduct of clinical trials during a dangerous disease outbreak in a resource-poor setting.

Deferred Consent for Randomized Controlled Trials in Emergency Care Settings

BACKGROUND

There is limited experience in using deferred consent for studies involving children, which was legalized in the United Kingdom in 2008. We aimed to inform future studies by evaluating consent rates and reasons for nonconsent in a large randomized controlled trial in pediatric intensive care.

METHODS

In the CATCH trial, eligible children from 14 PICUs in England and Wales were randomly assigned to 3 types of central venous catheters. To avoid delay in treatment, children admitted on an emergency basis were first randomly assigned to a trial central venous catheter, and we deferred seeking consent to use already collected data and blood samples until after stabilization.

RESULTS

Consent was obtained for 984/1358 (72%) of children admitted on an emergency basis. Failure to obtain consent resulted mainly from a lack of opportunity (early discharge or transfer) for survivors and difficulties in seeking consent for children who died. For admissions where there was an opportunity to approach (n = 1298), inclusion rates differed according to survival status: 93/984 (9%) of consented patients died, compared with 58/314 (18%) of nonconsented patients. For children admitted on an emergency basis whose families were approached, 984/1178 (84%) provided deferred consent (n = 15 sites), compared with 441/641 (69%) of children admitted on an elective basis who were approached for prospective consent (n = 9 sites).

CONCLUSIONS

Design of emergency randomized controlled trials should balance the potential burden that seeking consent in difficult situations may cause against risk of bias by disproportionately excluding children who die or are transferred. Ethics committees could consider approving the use of already collected data when best efforts to obtain deferred consent are unsuccessful.

Clinical Trial Decisions in Difficult Circumstances: Parental Consent Under Time Pressure

Treatments and interventions used to care for children in emergencies should be based on strong evidence. Well-designed clinical trials investigating these interventions for children are therefore indispensable. Parental informed consent is a key ethical requirement for the enrollment of children in such studies. However, if time is limited because of an urgent need for intervention, there are additional ethical challenges to adequately support the informed consent process. The acute situation and associated psychological impact may compromise the ability of parents to give informed consent. Little evidence exists to guide the process of consent seeking for a child's research participation when time is limited. It is also unclear in what circumstances alternatives to prospective informed consent could be applied. This article describes possible options to manage the informed consent process in an appropriate, practical, and, we believe, ethical way when time is limited.

How parents and practitioners experience research without prior consent (deferred consent) for emergency research involving children with life threatening conditions: a mixed method study

OBJECTIVE

Alternatives to prospective informed consent to enable children with life-threatening conditions to be entered into trials of emergency treatments are needed. Across Europe, a process called deferred consent has been developed as an alternative. Little is known about the views and experiences of those with first-hand experience of this controversial consent process. To inform how consent is sought for future paediatric critical care trials, we explored the views and experiences of parents and practitioners involved in the CATheter infections in CHildren (CATCH) trial, which allowed for deferred consent in certain circumstances.

DESIGN

Mixed method survey, interview and focus group study.

PARTICIPANTS

275 parents completed a questionnaire; 20 families participated in an interview (18 mothers, 5 fathers). 17 CATCH practitioners participated in one of four focus groups (10 nurses, 3 doctors and 4 clinical trial unit staff).

SETTING

12 UK children's hospitals.

RESULTS

Some parents were momentarily shocked or angered to discover that their child had or could have been entered into CATCH without their prior consent. Although these feelings resolved after the reasons why consent needed to be deferred were explained and that the CATCH interventions were already used in clinical care. Prior to seeking deferred consent for the first few times, CATCH practitioners were apprehensive, although their feelings abated with experience of talking to parents about CATCH. Parents reported that their decisions about their child's participation in the trial had been voluntary. However, mistiming the deferred consent discussion had caused distress for some. Practitioners and parents supported the use of deferred consent in CATCH and in future trials of interventions already used in clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides evidence to support the use of deferred consent in paediatric emergency medicine; it also indicates the crucial importance of practitioner communication and appropriate timing of deferred consent discussions.

Informed consent in paediatric critical care research--a South African perspective

BACKGROUND

Medical care of critically ill and injured infants and children globally should be based on best research evidence to ensure safe, efficacious treatment. In South Africa and other low and middle-income countries, research is needed to optimise care and ensure rational, equitable allocation of scare paediatric critical care resources. Ethical oversight is essential for safe, appropriate research conduct. Informed consent by the parent or legal guardian is usually required for child research participation, but obtaining consent may be challenging in paediatric critical care research. Local regulations may also impede important research if overly restrictive. By narratively synthesising and contextualising the results of a comprehensive literature review, this paper describes ethical principles and regulations; potential barriers to obtaining prospective informed consent; and consent options in the context of paediatric critical care research in South Africa.

DISCUSSION

Voluntary prospective informed consent from a parent or legal guardian is a statutory requirement for child research participation in South Africa. However, parents of critically ill or injured children might be incapable of or unwilling to provide the level of consent required to uphold the ethical principle of autonomy. In emergency care research it may not be practical to obtain consent when urgent action is required. Therapeutic misconceptions and sociocultural and language issues are also barriers to obtaining valid consent. Alternative consent options for paediatric critical care research include a waiver or deferred consent for minimal risk and/or emergency research, whilst prospective informed consent is appropriate for randomised trials of novel therapies or devices. We propose that parents or legal guardians of critically ill or injured children should only be approached to consent for their child's participation in clinical research when it is ethically justifiable and in the best interests of both child participant and parent. Where appropriate, alternatives to prospective informed consent should be considered to ensure that important paediatric critical care research can be undertaken in South Africa, whilst being cognisant of research risk. This document could provide a basis for debate on consent options in paediatric critical care research and contribute to efforts to advocate for South African law reform.

Benefits in cash or in kind? A community consultation on types of benefits in health research on the Kenyan Coast

Background

Providing benefits and payments to participants in health research, either in cash or in kind, is a common but ethically controversial practice. While much literature has concentrated on appropriate levels of benefits or payments, this paper focuses on less well explored ethical issues around the nature of study benefits, drawing on views of community members living close to an international health research centre in Kenya.

Methods

The consultation, including 90 residents purposively chosen to reflect diversity, used a two-stage deliberative process. Five half-day workshops were each followed by between two and four small group discussions, within a two week period (total 16 groups). During workshops and small groups, facilitators used participatory methods to share information, and promote reflection and debate on ethical issues around types of benefits, including cash, goods, medical and community benefits. Data from workshop and field notes, and voice recordings of small group discussions, were managed using Nvivo 10 and analysed using a Framework Analysis approach.

Findings and Conclusions

The methods generated in-depth discussion with high levels of engagement. Particularly for the most-poor, under-compensation of time in research carries risks of serious harm. Cash payments may best support compensation of costs experienced; while highly valued, goods and medical benefits may be more appropriate as an ‘appreciation’ or incentive for participation. Community benefits were seen as important in supporting but not replacing individual-level benefits, and in building trust in researcher-community relations. Cash payments were seen to have higher risks of undue inducement, commercialising relationships and generating family conflicts than other benefits, particularly where payments are high. Researchers should consider and account for burdens families may experience when children are involved in research. Careful context-specific research planning and skilled and consistent communication about study benefits and payments are important, including in mitigating potential negative effects.

Health providers' perceptions of clinical trials: lessons from Ghana, Kenya and Burkina Faso

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials conducted in Africa often require substantial investments to support trial centres and public health facilities. Trial resources could potentially generate benefits for routine health service delivery but may have unintended consequences. Strengthening ethical practice requires understanding the potential effects of trial inputs on the perceptions and practices of routine health care providers. This study explores the influence of malaria vaccine trials on health service delivery in Ghana, Kenya and Burkina Faso.

METHODS

We conducted: audits of trial inputs in 10 trial facilities and among 144 health workers; individual interviews with frontline providers (n=99) and health managers (n=14); and group discussions with fieldworkers (n=9 discussions). Descriptive summaries were generated from audit data. Qualitative data were analysed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Facilities involved in trials benefited from infrastructure and equipment upgrades, support with essential drugs, access to trial vehicles, and placement of additional qualified trial staff. Qualified trial staff in facilities were often seen as role models by their colleagues; assisting with supportive supervision and reducing facility workload. Some facility staff in place before the trial also received formal training and salary top-ups from the trials. However, differential access to support caused dissatisfaction, and some interviewees expressed concerns about what would happen at the end of the trial once financial and supervisory support was removed.

CONCLUSION

Clinical trials function as short-term complex health service delivery interventions in the facilities in which they are based. They have the potential to both benefit facilities, staff and communities through providing the supportive environment required for improvements in routine care, but they can also generate dissatisfaction, relationship challenges and demoralisation among staff. Minimising trial related harm and maximising benefits requires careful planning and engagement of key actors at the outset of trials, throughout the trial and on its' completion.