Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Selection bias in clinical stroke trials depending on ability to consent
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Selection bias in clinical stroke trials depending on ability to consent
Do you wish to request the book?
Selection bias in clinical stroke trials depending on ability to consent
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Selection bias in clinical stroke trials depending on ability to consent
2017
Overview
Background
Clinical trials are the hallmark of evidence-based medicine, but recruitment is often challenging, especially in stroke trials investigating patients not being able to give informed consent. In some nations, ethics committees will not approve of inclusion in a clinical study via consent of a legal representative. The ethical dilemma of including or excluding those patients has not been properly addressed, as there is little data on the effect of stroke characteristics on the ability to give informed consent.
Methods
To examine differences between patients able and unable to consent at inclusion to an acute stroke trial, we conducted a post-hoc analysis of monitoring records from a multicentric interventional trial. These records listed patients who gave informed consent by themselves and those who needed a legal representative to do so. This exemplary STRAWINSKI trial aimed at improving stroke outcome by biomarker-guided antibiotic treatment of stroke associated pneumonia and included patients within 40 h after stroke onset, suffering from MCA infarctions with an NIHSS score > 9 at admission. Standard descriptive and associative statistics were calculated to compare baseline characteristics and outcome measures between patients who were able to consent and those who were not.
Results
We identified the person giving consent in 228 out of 229 subjects. Patients with inability to consent were older (
p
< 0.01), suffered from more left-hemispheric (
p
< 0.01) and more severe strokes (NIHSS,
p
< 0.01), were more likely to die during hospitalisation (
p
< 0.01) or have unfavourable outcome at discharge (mRS,
p
< 0.01), to develop fever (
p
< 0.01) and tended to be more susceptible to infections (
p
= 0.06) during the acute course of the disorder.
Conclusions
Demographics, stroke characteristics and outcomes significantly affect stroke patients in their ability to consent. Where selection criteria and primary outcome measures of a trial are significantly affected by ability to consent, excluding patients unable to consent might be unethical.
Trial registration
URL
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov
. Unique identifier:
NCT01264549
.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,BMC
Subject
