Skip to main content
Subscribe
  • Login
  • My Account
  • Logout
  • Register For Free
  • Subscribe
  • News
    • Current News
    • Providers
    • Insurance
    • Government
    • Finance
    • Technology
    • Safety & Quality
    • Digital Health
    • Transformation
    • ESG
    • People
    • Regional News
    • Digital Edition (Web Version)
    • Patients
    • Operations
    • Care Delivery
    • Payment
    • Midwest
    • Northeast
    • South
    • West
  • Blogs
    • AI
    • Deals
    • Layoff Tracker
    • HLTH 2024
    • Sponsored Content: Vital Signs Blog
  • Opinion
    • Letters
    • From the Editor
  • Events & Awards
    • Awards
    • Conferences
    • Galas
    • Virtual Briefings
    • Webinars
    • Nominate/Eligibility
    • 100 Most Influential People
    • 50 Most Influential Clinical Executives
    • 40 Under 40
    • Best Places to Work in Healthcare
    • Healthcare Marketing Impact Awards
    • Innovators Awards
    • Diversity Leaders
    • Leading Women
    • Best in Business Awards
    • The 2030 Playbook Conference
    • Innovations in Patient Experience
    • Leading Women Conference & Awards Luncheon
    • Leadership Summit
    • Workforce Summit
    • Best Places to Work Awards Gala
    • Diversity Leaders Gala
    • - Looking Ahead to 2025
    • - Financial Growth
    • - Hospital of the Future
    • - Value Based Care
    • - Looking Ahead to 2026
  • Multimedia
    • Podcast - Beyond the Byline
    • Sponsored Podcast - Healthcare Insider
    • Sponsored Video Series - One on One
    • Sponsored Video Series - Checking In with Dan Peres
  • Data & Insights
    • Data & Insights Home
    • Hospital Financials
    • Staffing & Compensation
    • Quality & Safety
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Skilled Nursing Facilities
    • Data Archive
    • Resource Guide: By the Numbers
    • Surveys
    • Data Points
  • Newsletters
  • MORE+
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Media Kit
    • Jobs
    • People on the Move
    • Reprints & Licensing
    • Sponsored Content
MENU
Breadcrumb
  1. Home
  2. Safety & Quality
November 11, 2014 11:00 PM

Comments sought on informed consent in rules for comparison studies

Sabriya Rice
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Share
  • Email
  • More
    Reprints Print

    The federal government is considering possible changes to what risks and benefits researchers must describe to patients who participate in studies comparing the effectiveness of already approved treatments and procedures.

    But those recently issued draft recommendations are not sitting well with some researchers, who say they would lead to an informed consent process that confuses researchers and misleads patients.

    The Office for Human Research Protections, a federal agency tasked with protecting the rights of patients involved in research conducted or supported by HHS, recently issued a draft report addressing what risks should be revealed to participants in comparative effectiveness research, or CER studies.

    This type of research generally looks at approved, widely used therapies, for which there is some disagreement about effectiveness. Efforts toward these types of comparisons have been fueled by provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which aimed to not only compare the efficacy of competing treatments, but also help drive down healthcare costs.

    But as comparative effectiveness research has become more common, so too have questions about how the HHS human subject protection regulations apply to such research, according to guidance issued on Oct. 24 by the Office for Human Research Protections. The agency noted uncertainty about which risks are considered to be “reasonably foreseeable.” Redefining this could change how the treatments are described to prospective subjects during the informed consent process.

    The report, published in the Federal Register, cites a determination from last March (PDF) that decided parents did not receive the proper informed consent for a clinical trial in which premature babies received different oxygen supplementation levels. The infants had a 50% chance of being randomly assigned to either a low or high oxygen arm.

    Researchers argued both ranges of oxygen saturation provided were within the standard of care and there were no known risks to participants. But OHRP disagreed with that perspective and said the key issue is that the treatment and possible risks were different from those the babies would have been exposed to if they had not been in the trial at all.

    The new OHRP guidance aims to address issues such as these, but the report is both “confused and confusing,” according to two Kansas researchers who published commentary on the topic Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

    The OHRP does not distinguish risk from harm and assumes that any change in treatment leads to a foreseeable risk, wrote Dr. John Lantos, director of the Children's Mercy Bioethics Center and Dr. John Spertus, director of health outcomes research at St. Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, both in Kansas City, Mo.

    “If the proposed rules became adopted, I would be required to misinform my patients,” Lantos said in a phone interview. If the OHRP view of risk is adopted, it would require a misleading informed-consent document that overstates the risk of being in research and understates the risk of existing practice variation, he said. “I don't see how that meets the ethical requirements of informed consent, and it is likely to confuse researchers,” he said.

    The OHRP is soliciting written commentary; interested parties have until Dec. 23 to submit comments.

    Follow Sabriya Rice on Twitter: @Sabriyarice

    Letter
    to the
    Editor

    Send us a letter

    Have an opinion about this story? Click here to submit a Letter to the Editor, and we may publish it in print.

    Recommended for You
    patient nurse grade
    Leapfrog hospital grades improve with help from AI, tech
    Leapfrog grades hospital
    Leapfrog makes updates to annual hospital survey
    Most Popular
    1
    'Legendary' Hemsley takes over at UnitedHealth amid rough seas
    2
    Big retail tried to disrupt healthcare—who is making a dent?
    3
    These are the regulations the AHA wants RFK Jr. to scrap
    4
    Downside risk, upside payment highlight new CMS innovation agenda
    5
    Medicaid cuts bill clears key House committee
    Sponsored Content
    Get Newsletters

    Sign up for enewsletters and alerts to receive breaking news and in-depth coverage of healthcare events and trends, as they happen, right to your inbox.

    Subscribe Today
    MH Magazine Cover

    MH magazine offers content that sheds light on healthcare leaders’ complex choices and touch points—from strategy, governance, leadership development and finance to operations, clinical care, and marketing.

    Subscribe
    Connect with Us
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS

    Our Mission

    Modern Healthcare empowers industry leaders to succeed by providing unbiased reporting of the news, insights, analysis and data.

    Contact Us

    (877) 812-1581

    Email us

     

    Resources
    • Contact Us
    • Help Center
    • Advertise with Us
    • Ad Choices
    • Sitemap
    Editorial Dept
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Code of Ethics
    • Awards
    • About Us
    Legal
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Privacy Request
    Modern Healthcare
    Copyright © 1996-2025. Crain Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
    • News
      • Current News
      • Providers
      • Insurance
      • Government
      • Finance
      • Technology
      • Safety & Quality
      • Digital Health
      • Transformation
        • Patients
        • Operations
        • Care Delivery
        • Payment
      • ESG
      • People
      • Regional News
        • Midwest
        • Northeast
        • South
        • West
      • Digital Edition (Web Version)
    • Blogs
      • AI
      • Deals
      • Layoff Tracker
      • HLTH 2024
      • Sponsored Content: Vital Signs Blog
    • Opinion
      • Letters
      • From the Editor
    • Events & Awards
      • Awards
        • Nominate/Eligibility
        • 100 Most Influential People
        • 50 Most Influential Clinical Executives
        • 40 Under 40
        • Best Places to Work in Healthcare
        • Healthcare Marketing Impact Awards
        • Innovators Awards
        • Diversity Leaders
        • Leading Women
        • Best in Business Awards
      • Conferences
        • The 2030 Playbook Conference
        • Innovations in Patient Experience
        • Leading Women Conference & Awards Luncheon
        • Leadership Summit
        • Workforce Summit
      • Galas
        • Best Places to Work Awards Gala
        • Diversity Leaders Gala
      • Virtual Briefings
        • - Looking Ahead to 2025
        • - Financial Growth
        • - Hospital of the Future
        • - Value Based Care
        • - Looking Ahead to 2026
      • Webinars
    • Multimedia
      • Podcast - Beyond the Byline
      • Sponsored Podcast - Healthcare Insider
      • Sponsored Video Series - One on One
      • Sponsored Video Series - Checking In with Dan Peres
    • Data & Insights
      • Data & Insights Home
      • Hospital Financials
      • Staffing & Compensation
      • Quality & Safety
      • Mergers & Acquisitions
      • Skilled Nursing Facilities
      • Data Archive
      • Resource Guide: By the Numbers
      • Surveys
      • Data Points
    • Newsletters
    • MORE+
      • Contact Us
      • Advertise
      • Media Kit
      • Jobs
      • People on the Move
      • Reprints & Licensing
      • Sponsored Content