As guidelines for neonatal resuscitation evolve from a growing evidence base, clinicians must ensure that practice is closely aligned with the available evidence, based on methodologically sound and ethically conducted research. This paper reviews ethical, legal and risk-management issues arising during the design of a quality-assurance project to make video recordings of neonatal resuscitations after high-risk deliveries. The issues, which affect patients, researchers, staff and the hospital at large, include the following: 1) Informed consent for research involving emergency procedures is (...) often not possible, for lack of time to provide sufficient information. The mental capacity of the subject or parent may be compromised by the impending emergency, and freedom of choice is threatened by the time pressure to consent. 2) Video recording of the inevitable medical errors raises issues of whether participating staff may be identifiable and accountable, affecting their willingness to participate in such research. The approach to staff participation and identification is reviewed. 3) The use of video data for education threatens the privacy of research subjects. The ethics of maintaining privacy is balanced with the ethics of using the data to improve practice of resuscitation. 4) The research subjects (patients, or the staff whose performance is being monitored) must be defined. 5) There are legal and ethical aspects of management and ownership of data. 6) The role of the Human Research Ethics Committee in protecting the research subject and possibly the medicolegal interests of the hospital is discussed. This paper reviews the literature and discusses the issues. (shrink)

ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe how parents and physicians experienced the informed consent interview and to investigate the aspects of the relationship that influenced parents’ decision during the consent process for a randomised clinical trial in a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit. The secondary objective was to describe the perspectives of parents and physicians in the specific situation of prenatal informed consent.SettingSingle centre study in NICU of the Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, France, using a convenience period from February to (...) May 2016.DesignAncillary study to a randomised clinical trial: Prettineo. Records of interviews for consent. Population: parents and physicians. Mixed study including qualitative and quantitative interview data about participants’ recall and feelings about the consent process. Interviews were reviewed using thematic discourse analysis.ResultsParents’ recall and understanding of the study’s main goal and design was good. Parents and physicians had a positive experience, and trust was one of the main reasons for parents to consent. Misunderstanding was the main reason for refusal.Before birth, three situations can compromise parents’ consent: the mother already consented to participate in other studies, the absence of the father during the interview and the feeling that the baby’s birth is not an imminent possibility.ConclusionsConfronting parents and physicians’ perspectives in research can help us reach answers to sensitive issues such as content and timing of information. Each different types of study raises different ethical dilemmas for consent that might be discussed in a more individual way. (shrink)

Objective: Obtaining informed consent for resuscitation research, especially in the newborn, is problematic. This study aimed to evaluate parental preferences for hypothetical consent procedures in neonatal resuscitation research.Design: Mail-out survey questionnaire.Setting/participants: Randomly selected parents who had received obstetrical or neonatal care at a tertiary perinatal centre.Main outcome measures: Parental levels of comfort regarding different methods of obtaining consent in hypothetical resuscitation research scenarios.Results: The response rate was 34%. The respondents were a group of highly educated women with a higher family (...) income than would be expected in the general population. In terms of results, parents valued the impact the research would have on their baby and the importance of a positive interaction with the physicians conducting the research study. Parents felt most comfortable with prospective consent in the setting of prenatal classes or prenatal visits with a physician, but they were somewhat uncomfortable with prospective consent upon admission to hospital after labour had begun. Parents were uncomfortable with waived consent, deferred consent, and opting out, no matter when during the pregnancy consent was requested.Conclusion: This pilot study reports parental preferences for prenatal information and consent for such research trials of neonatal resuscitation. A low response rate and potentially skewed demographics of the respondents prevent generalisability of this result. Interview studies should be performed to better determine parental preferences for informed consent in a more representative population. (shrink)

The objective of the study was to explore parental experiences of being offered participation in a previous neonatal research study involving venepuncture. The method employed was a questionnaire-based exploration of parents' attitudes in those approached to participate in a study of term and preterm immunization responses (Preterm Immunisation Study [PREMIS]). We explored experience of the initial approach, knowledge of study, venepuncture and views on research ‘in general’. In all, 59% of families responded. Highest response rates were for those participating in (...) PREMIS (87% term/69% preterm) and lowest in decliners (34% and 35%). Responding parents participating in PREMIS were well informed, positive about research and did not find the venepuncture problematic. Sixty percent of responding parents who declined PREMIS attributed their declining to the need for venepuncture. In conclusion, parents participating or declining a neonatal study involving venepuncture are different, but participating parents were well informed and seemed able to judge that participation was right for them such that in consenting families venepuncture itself is not problematic. (shrink)