Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, 4th Floor Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 0GB, UK.
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Jul 18;23(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00809-5.
People who are unable to make decisions about participating in research rely on proxies to make a decision based on their wishes and preferences. However, patients rarely discuss their preferences about research and proxies find it challenging to determine what their wishes would be. While the process of informed consent has traditionally been the focus of research to improve consent decisions, the more conceptually complex area of what constitutes 'good' proxy decision-making for research has remained unexplored. Interventions are needed to improve and support proxy decision-making for research but are hampered by a lack of understanding about what constitutes decision quality in this context. A global increase in conditions associated with cognitive impairment such as dementia has led to an urgent need for more research into these conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent necessity to conduct research with large numbers of critically ill patients has made this need even more pressing. Much of the empirical research centres on the desire to improve decision accuracy, despite growing evidence that authenticity is more reflective of the aim of proxy decisions and concerns about the methodological flaws in authenticity-focused studies. Such studies also fail to take account of the impact of decision-making on proxies, or the considerable body of research on improving the quality of healthcare decisions. This paper reports a concept synthesis of the literature that was conducted to develop the first conceptualisation of 'good' proxy decisions about research participation. Elements of decision quality were identified across three stages of decision-making: proxy preparedness for decision-making which includes knowledge and understanding, and values clarification and preference elicitation; the role of uncertainty, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret in the decision-making process; and preference linked outcomes and their effect. This conceptualisation provides an essential first step towards the future development of interventions to enhance the quality of proxy decision-making and ensure proxy decisions represent patients' values and preferences.
无法对参与研究做出决定的人依赖代理人根据他们的意愿和偏好做出决定。然而,患者很少讨论他们对研究的偏好,而代理人发现很难确定他们的意愿是什么。虽然知情同意的过程一直是研究的重点,以改善同意决定,但作为研究中“良好”代理决策的更具概念性的复杂领域仍然没有得到探索。需要进行干预以改善和支持研究的代理决策,但由于缺乏对这方面决策质量构成的理解而受到阻碍。与痴呆症等认知障碍相关的疾病在全球范围内的增加,导致对这些疾病进行更多研究的需求变得更加迫切。COVID-19 大流行以及随后需要对大量重症患者进行研究,使得这一需求更加紧迫。尽管越来越多的证据表明真实性更能反映代理决策的目的,并关注真实性为重点的研究中的方法缺陷,但大多数实证研究都集中在提高决策准确性上。这些研究也没有考虑到决策对代理人的影响,或者改善医疗保健决策质量的大量研究。本文报告了对文献的概念综合,旨在首次对研究参与的“良好”代理决策进行概念化。决策质量的要素在决策的三个阶段中确定:代理决策准备,包括知识和理解,以及价值观澄清和偏好 elicitation;不确定性、决策冲突、满意度和遗憾在决策过程中的作用;以及偏好相关的结果及其影响。这种概念化提供了朝着未来发展干预措施以提高代理决策质量并确保代理决策代表患者价值观和偏好的重要的第一步。