Advances in neuromodulation and an improved understanding of the anatomy and circuitry of psychopathology have led to a resurgence of interest in surgery for psychiatric disease. Clinical trials exploring deep brain stimulation (DBS), a focally targeted, adjustable and reversible form of neurosurgery, are being developed to address the use of this technology in highly selected patient populations. Psychiatric patients deemed eligible for surgical intervention, such as DBS, typically meet stringent inclusion criteria, including demonstrated severity, chronicity and a failure of conventional (...) therapy. Although a humanitarian device exemption by the US Food and Drug Administration exists for its use in obsessive-compulsive disorder, DBS remains a largely experimental treatment in the psychiatric context, with its use currently limited to clinical trials and investigative studies. The combination of a patient population at the limits of conventional therapy and a novel technology in a new indication poses interesting challenges to the informed consent process as it relates to clinical trial enrollment. These challenges can be divided into those that relate to the patient, their disease and the technology, with each illustrating how traditional conceptualisations of research consent may be inadequate in the surgical psychiatry context. With specific reference to risk analysis, patient autonomy, voluntariness and the duty of the clinician-researcher, this paper will discuss the unique challenges that clinical trials of surgery for refractory psychiatric disease present to the consent process. Recommendations are also made for an ethical approach to clinical trial consent acquisition in this unique patient population. (shrink)

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an up-and-coming therapeutic approach in psychiatry. Although recent studies have demonstrated that DBS is relatively safe, little is known about its impact on a patient's life. A comprehensive outcome assessment is required so as to ensure valid scientific findings for the proper counseling of future patients; a thorough benefit–harm assessment plays an important role in planning of the therapeutic process. Starting from a basic anthropological and ethical premise, disorder-specific and intervention-related parameters concerning a wide range (...) of data relating to the individual person would need to be amassed. These data can be collected by means of a combination of quantitative tests and qualitative interviews, including the perspective of the patient and of a closely related person. They can be presented using codes from the WHO International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). An international consensus group on outcome assessment and coding according to the ICF could be established in psychiatric DBS. (shrink)

Assessment of outcome following deep brain stimulation (DBS) has traditionally focused on symptom-specific and quality-of-life measures. Greater attention needs to be paid to the diversity of patient goals and values, as well as recognition of the shifting nature of those goals over the course of DBS therapy. We report preliminary data from an empirical study examining patients’ goals with respect to DBS in the treatment of Parkinson disease. We argue that a multifaceted assessment of outcome over time, including well-validated symptom (...) measures, quality of life, and functional and patient specific metrics, is ethically necessary in order to fulfill fiduciary and professional responsibilities. These assessments should be augmented with a deliberative multidisciplinary process of review and evaluation. Such an approach will lead to improved inform consent, promote better clinical research, and facilitate good patient care by providing a systematic mechanism for capturing and acting on important patient insights. These processes become increasingly critical as DBS begins to be applied to neuropsychiatric disorders. (shrink)