Informed Consent May Be Compromised & Medical Device reform
In a study published today in IRB: Ethics and Human Research (free abstract, $ subscription for full article), concluded that unrealistic optimism is prevalent among some clinical study subjects and that it "has the potential to compromise informed consent". Seventy-two early phase cancer study subjects completed questionnaires designed to assess their level of understanding of the study's purpose as well as to detect signs of unrealistic optimism. Unrealistic optimism is defined as "specific to a situation and consider (sic) a form of bias...and is distinct from "dispositional optimism, which is a general outlook on life and is neither realistic nor unrealistic". Questions to reveal unrealistic optimism revolved around the likelihood of particular individual outcomes as compared with other study participants, or the participant's tendency to give greater weight to possible benefits than possible risks. According to the study's findings, 72 percent of the subjects accurately understood the objectives of the cancer trial in terms of potential benefits to future cancer patients rather than directly to themselves, which means that 28% of respondents did not clearly separate those facts. The researchers' concluded that we need to improve the informed consent process by "paying more attention to how patients apply the consent information to themselves". Reporting on the trial is found online at Medical News Today.
In other news, last week the FDA announced proposed changes to improve the agency's 510(k) program for approving medical devices for sale. Some of the recommendations include:
- consolidate the terms “indication for use” and “intended use” into a single term, “intended use”;
- expand its statutory authority to consider off-label use when determining the intended use of a device;
- issue guidance on when a device should no longer be available for use as a predicate;
- issue a regulation on its rescission authority;
- issue guidance to create a “Class IIb”; and
- seek greater authorities to require postmarket surveillance studies as a condition of clearance for certain devices.
The full report is here (PDF). FierceMedicalDevices reported generally favorable reception of this news by the industry. We have a long way to go until any of the report's recommendations become regulation, but now at least we have some ideas of which way the agency's thinking is going. At the same time, the Wall Street Journal carried an op-ed by President Obama discussing the balance between regulator and free market. It all makes for very interesting reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment