Attitudes of patients and family members towards deferred and waived consent in ECPR research, an ancillary study of the INCEPTION trial

TL;DR

This study explores how patients and their families feel about bypassing or delaying consent for emergency CPR research, finding generally positive attitudes.

Contribution

The study provides novel insights into patient and family perspectives on deferred and waived consent in high-risk emergency research.

Findings

81.3% of respondents (strongly) supported alternative consent procedures in emergency research.

No significant differences in attitudes were found between survivors and non-survivors or between ECPR and CCPR.

Aftercare contact improved understanding and aided in bereavement processing.

Abstract

In emergency settings, obtaining timely informed consent is not always feasible, making deferred and waived consent a potential solution. Despite its frequent use in high-risk research, the experiences and opinions of patients and (bereaved) relatives have been scarcely investigated. This study examined their attitudes towards enrolment in the INCEPTION-trial (NCT03101787) on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR).

Questionnaires were sent to survivors and (bereaved) relatives who had signed consent forms for follow-up research in the initial INCEPTION-trial. Additionally, relatives where consent was waived were contacted through their general practitioner with a request to participate. Responses included Likert-scale and free-text data, were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests.

A total of 32 of 38 (overall response rate 84.2%) sent questionnaires were returned, from 9 survivors, 9 corresponding relatives of these survivors, 6 relatives of non-survivors who provided proxy consent and 8 relatives of non-survivors whose consent was waived. 81.3% of the respondents (strongly) supported alternative consent procedures. No statistically significant differences were found between survivors and non-survivors or ECPR versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR). The need for, and challenges of research in an emergency setting were acknowledged. Aftercare contact improved understanding of the trial and helped in bereavement processing.

Overall, patients and (bereaved) relatives had a positive attitude towards waived and deferred consent procedures in high-risk, high-mortality research in the emergency setting. Information provision at a later stage, once the emotional burden has eased, is appreciated.

Figures