Ethical issues in implementation research: a discussion of the problems in achieving informed consent

Article English OPEN
Hutton, Jane L ; Eccles, Martin P ; Grimshaw, Jeremy M (2008)
  • Publisher: Springer Nature
  • Journal: Implementation Science, volume 3, pages 52-52 (eissn: 1748-5908)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-52, pmc: PMC2639614
  • Subject: Debate | Health Policy | Medicine(all) | R1 | Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Background: Improved quality of care is a policy objective of health care systems around the world. Implementation research is the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of clinical research findings into routine clinical practice, and hence to reduce inappropriate\ud care. It includes the study of influences on healthcare professionals' behaviour and methods to enable them to use research findings more effectively. Cluster randomized trials represent the optimal design for evaluating the effectiveness of implementation strategies. Various codes of\ud medical ethics, such as the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki inform medical research, but their relevance to cluster randomised trials in implementation research is unclear. This paper discusses the applicability of various ethical codes to obtaining consent in cluster trials in implementation research.\ud Discussion: The appropriate application of biomedical codes to implementation research is not obvious. Discussion of the nature and practice of informed consent in implementation research cluster trials must consider the levels at which consent can be sought, and for what purpose it can be sought. The level at which an intervention is delivered can render the idea of patient level\ud consent meaningless. Careful consideration of the ownership of information, and rights of access to and exploitation of data is required. For health care professionals and organizations, there is a balance between clinical freedom and responsibility to participate in research.\ud Summary: While ethical justification for clinical trials relies heavily on individual consent, for\ud implementation research aspects of distributive justice, economics, and political philosophy underlie the debate. Societies may need to trade off decisions on the choice between individualized consent and valid implementation research. We suggest that social sciences codes could usefully inform the consideration of implementation research by members of Research Ethics Committees.
  • References (40)
    40 references, page 1 of 4

    1. Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice; about effective implementation of change in patient care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-30.

    2. Grimshaw J, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay C, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles M, Matowe L, Shirren L, Wensing M, Dijkstra R, Donaldson C: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004, 8:.

    3. Foy R, Eccles M, Grimshaw J: Why does primary care need more implementation research? Family Practice 2001, 18:.

    4. Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Campbell M, Ramsay C: Research designs for studies evaluating the effectiveness of change and improvement strategies. Qual Safety Health Care 2003, 12:47-52.

    5. The Nuremberg Code: (1947) Brit Med J 1996, 313:1448 [http:/ /].

    6. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects 2000 1964 [http://].

    7. Hutton JL: Are distinctive ethical principles required for cluster randomised controlled trials? Statist Med 2001, 20:473-488.

    8. International Statistical Institute: Declaration of Professional Ethics 1985 []. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute

    9. Royal Statistical Society: Code of Conduct London: The Royal Statistical Society; 1993.

    10. American Statistical Association: Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice 1999 []. Alexandria: ASA Committee on Professional Ethics

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark