Lötjönen S
National Advisory Board on Reasearch Ethics, Helsinki, Finland.
J Med Ethics. 2002 Jun;28(3):183-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.3.183.
Clinical emergencies necessitate immediate action to avert the danger to the patient's life or health. Emergency patients might be in greatest need of novel therapies, and even presumed willing to assume some risk, but research into emergency conditions should be conducted under commonly accepted principles that fulfil the scientific, ethical, and legal criteria. Such criteria already exist in the US, but are still under development in Europe. This article introduces criteria upon which trials in emergency settings may be ethically and legally justified in Europe. Based on both legal texts and professional guidelines, the author has established seven conditions for emergency research, of which informed consent and its substitutes, as well as the conditions of direct benefit requirement and necessity, are considered most problematic and therefore analysed more closely. Other conditions include absence of alternative methods, scientific validity, and approval by an ethics committee.
临床急症需要立即采取行动,以避免对患者生命或健康造成危险。急诊患者可能最需要新的治疗方法,甚至假定他们愿意承担一定风险,但对急症情况的研究应在符合科学、伦理和法律标准的普遍接受的原则下进行。此类标准在美国已经存在,但在欧洲仍在制定中。本文介绍了在欧洲进行急症环境试验在伦理和法律上可能合理的标准。基于法律文本和专业指南,作者确立了急诊研究的七个条件,其中知情同意及其替代方式,以及直接受益要求和必要性条件被认为最具问题,因此进行了更深入的分析。其他条件包括没有替代方法、科学有效性以及伦理委员会的批准。