Barron Jeremy S, Duffey Patricia L, Byrd Linda Jo, Campbell Robin, Ferrucci Luigi
Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2004 Feb;16(1):79-85. doi: 10.1007/BF03324536.
Informed consent has been the most scrutinized and controversial aspect of clinical research ethics. Institutional review boards (IRBs), government regulatory agencies, and the threat of litigation have all contributed to increasingly detailed consent documents that hope to ensure that subjects are not misled or coerced. Unfortunately, the growing regulatory burden on researchers has not succeeded in protecting subjects, but has rather made the consent process less effective and has discouraged research on vulnerable populations. As a matter of fact, investigators and ethicists continue to identify failures of the consenting process, particularly concerning participation in research of older individuals. The challenges involved in ensuring appropriate consent from the elderly include physical frailty, reduced autonomy and privacy, and impaired decision-making capacity due to dementia, delirium, or other neuropsychiatric illnesses. Ageism among investigators also contributes to failure of informed consent. The evaluation and continuing re-evaluation of an individual's decision-making capacity is critical but difficult. In the most extreme cases, the older adult's ability to participate in the consent process is clearly impaired. However, in many instances, the decision-making capacity is only partially impaired but declines during the course of a research project. Implementing methods of effective communication may enable many frail elderly individuals to make informed decisions. Special challenges are posed by research on end-of-life care, which typically involves frail, older subjects who are uniquely vulnerable, and research is conducted in institutional settings where subtle violations of autonomy are routine. Clearly, the frail elderly represent a vulnerable population that deserves special attention when developing and evaluating an informed consent process. Two important ethical conflicts should be kept in mind. First, although vulnerable older patients must be protected, protection should not prevent research on this important population. Similarly, because informed consent documents are often written to prevent legal jeopardy, these technical documents, expressed in language sometimes difficult to understand, can prevent comprehension of basic issues, defeating the ethical purpose of human protection.
知情同意一直是临床研究伦理中受到最严格审查且最具争议的方面。机构审查委员会(IRB)、政府监管机构以及诉讼威胁都促使同意文件越来越详细,希望确保受试者不会被误导或胁迫。不幸的是,研究人员日益增加的监管负担并未成功保护受试者,反而使同意过程的效果降低,并阻碍了对弱势群体的研究。事实上,研究人员和伦理学家继续发现同意过程存在缺陷,尤其是在老年人参与研究方面。确保老年人适当同意所涉及的挑战包括身体虚弱、自主性和隐私性降低,以及由于痴呆、谵妄或其他神经精神疾病导致的决策能力受损。研究人员中的年龄歧视也导致了知情同意的失败。对个体决策能力的评估和持续重新评估至关重要但也很困难。在最极端的情况下,老年人参与同意过程的能力明显受损。然而,在许多情况下,决策能力只是部分受损,但在研究项目过程中会下降。实施有效的沟通方法可能使许多体弱的老年人能够做出明智的决定。临终关怀研究带来了特殊挑战,这类研究通常涉及特别脆弱的体弱老年受试者,而且研究是在机构环境中进行的,在这种环境中,对自主性的微妙侵犯很常见。显然,体弱老年人是一个弱势群体,在制定和评估知情同意过程时值得特别关注。应牢记两个重要的伦理冲突。首先,虽然必须保护脆弱的老年患者,但保护不应妨碍对这一重要人群的研究。同样,由于知情同意文件往往是为防止法律风险而撰写的,这些用有时难以理解的语言表达的技术文件可能会妨碍对基本问题的理解,从而违背了保护人类的伦理目的。