Palmer Barton W, Harmell Alexandrea L, Pinto Luz L, Dunn Laura B, Kim Scott Y H, Golshan Shahrokh, Jeste Dilip V
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego ; Veterans Medical Research Foundation, San Diego, CA ; Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System ; Center for Healthy Aging/Stein Institute for Research on Aging, University of California, San Diego.
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego ; Center for Healthy Aging/Stein Institute for Research on Aging, University of California, San Diego ; San Diego State University/University of California San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, CA.
Clin Gerontol. 2017;40(1):24-34. doi: 10.1080/07317115.2016.1197352. Epub 2016 Jun 7.
Investigators conducting Alzheimer's disease (AD) research need to consider participants' capacity to consent. Cognitive functioning is a significant predictor of decisional capacity, but there is a dearth of information on the influence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in AD on decisional capacity. We examined the rates of decisional capacity associated with two types of research protocols, and the association of capacity with neuropsychiatric symptoms and other participant characteristics.
We comprehensively evaluated decisional capacity among 64 patients with mild-to-moderate AD and 70 healthy comparison (HC) subjects randomized to consider either a medium risk or higher risk hypothetical research protocol. Additional measures included sociodemographics, cognitive deficits, and neuropsychiatric symptoms.
Twenty AD patients (31.3%) and 67 HCs (95.7%) were deemed capable; 44 AD patients (68.8%) and 3 HCs (4.3%) incapable of consent. Age, education, and severity of cognitive deficits were associated with incapable status; there were no significant associations with severity of neuropsychiatric symptoms or protocol risk level.
Findings highlight the importance of understanding of capacity and its assessment among people with AD, rather than treating AD diagnosis as synonymous with impaired capacity. As novel treatments move from bench to bedside, methods of assessing and addressing capacity impairment must similarly advance.
In assessing research consent capacity, use structured assessments with population specific cut scores interpreted in the context of the person's background including education, culture, and language. Individuals should be encouraged to execute research proxy documents when able.
开展阿尔茨海默病(AD)研究的调查人员需要考虑参与者的同意能力。认知功能是决策能力的重要预测指标,但关于AD患者神经精神症状对决策能力的影响,相关信息匮乏。我们研究了与两种研究方案相关的决策能力比率,以及能力与神经精神症状和其他参与者特征之间的关联。
我们对64例轻度至中度AD患者和70例健康对照(HC)受试者进行了全面的决策能力评估,这些受试者被随机分配考虑中等风险或更高风险的假设研究方案。其他测量指标包括社会人口统计学、认知缺陷和神经精神症状。
20例AD患者(31.3%)和67例HC受试者(95.7%)被认为有能力;44例AD患者(68.8%)和3例HC受试者(4.3%)无同意能力。年龄、教育程度和认知缺陷严重程度与无能力状态相关;与神经精神症状严重程度或方案风险水平无显著关联。
研究结果凸显了理解AD患者的能力及其评估的重要性,而不是将AD诊断等同于能力受损。随着新疗法从实验室走向临床,评估和解决能力损害的方法也必须相应改进。
在评估研究同意能力时,使用具有针对特定人群的划界分数的结构化评估,并结合个人背景(包括教育、文化和语言)进行解释。应鼓励个体在有能力时签署研究代理文件。