title: Surrogate consent for research involving adults with impaired decision making: survey of Institutional Review Board practices.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Most critically ill adults have impaired decision-making capacity and are unable to consent to research. Yet, little is known about how Institutional Review Boards interpret the Common Rule's call for safeguards in research involving incapacitated adults. We aimed to examine Institutional Review Board practices on surrogate consent and other safeguards to protect incapacitated adults in research.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cross-sectional survey of 104 Institutional Review Boards from a random sample of U.S. institutions engaged in adult human subject research (response rate, 68%) in 2007 and 2008.
  
  
  METHODS
  None.
  
  
  METHODS
  Institutional Review Board acceptance of surrogate consent, research risks, and other safeguards in research involving incapacitated adults.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Institutional Review Boards reported that, in the previous year, they sometimes (49%), frequently (33%), or very frequently (2%) reviewed studies involving patients in the intensive care unit. Six Institutional Review Boards (6%) do not accept surrogate consent for research from any persons, and 22% of Institutional Review Boards accept only an authorized proxy, spouse, or parent as surrogates, excluding adult children and other family. Institutional Review Boards vary in their limits on research risks in studies involving incapacitated adults: 15% disallow any research regardless of risk in studies without direct benefit, whereas 39% allow only minimal risks. When there was potential benefit, fewer Institutional Review Boards limit the risk at minimal (11%; p < .001). Even in populations at high risk for impaired decision making, many Institutional Review Boards rarely or never required procedures to determine capacity (13%-21%). Institutional Review Boards also varied in their use of independent monitors, research proxies, and advanced research directives.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Much variability exists in Institutional Review Board surrogate consent practices and limits on risks in studies involving incapacitated adults. This variability may have adverse consequences for needed research involving incapacitated adults. Clarification of current regulations is needed to provide guidance.
authors.affiliation: Division of Critical Care Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. mgong@montefiore.org
authors.forename: Michelle Ng
authors.initials: MN
authors.lastname: Gong
authors.forename: Gary
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Winkel
authors.forename: Rosamond
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Rhodes
authors.forename: Lynne D
authors.initials: LD
authors.lastname: Richardson
authors.forename: Jeffrey H
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Silverstein
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005190:Family; D005260:Female; D019538:Health Care Surveys; D006801:Humans; D007362:Intensive Care Units / Q000941:ethics; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016134:Organizational Policy; D010290:Parents; D018570:Risk Assessment; D018454:Spouses; D020458:Third-Party Consent / Q000941:ethics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D014481:United States
references.citation: Acad Emerg Med. 1999 Aug;6(8):776-80
references.pmid: 10463547
references.citation: Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Feb;166(2):182-8
references.pmid: 18923066
references.citation: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1997 Jan;12(1):27-33
references.pmid: 9050420
references.citation: Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Jul;62(7):726-33
references.pmid: 15997013
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2001 Oct 2;135(7):514-23
references.pmid: 11578155
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Mar;39(3):248-53
references.pmid: 11867976
references.citation: Gerontologist. 2000 Aug;40(4):449-57
references.pmid: 10961034
references.citation: JAMA. 2004 Jan 28;291(4):476-82
references.pmid: 14747505
references.citation: Clin Chest Med. 2003 Dec;24(4):727-37
references.pmid: 14710700
references.citation: Neurology. 2009 Jan 13;72(2):149-55
references.pmid: 19139366
references.citation: Ann Oncol. 2002 Aug;13(8):1307-13
references.pmid: 12181256
references.citation: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2008 Jan;16(1):83-91
references.pmid: 18165463
references.citation: Crit Care Med. 2000 Jan;28(1):232-5
references.pmid: 10667529
references.citation: Stroke. 2008 Oct;39(10):2732-5
references.pmid: 18658034
references.citation: Lancet. 1998 Mar 21;351(9106):857-61
references.pmid: 9525362
references.citation: Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004 Jan 1;169(1):46-56
references.pmid: 12958048
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2000 May 4;342(18):1301-8
references.pmid: 10793162
references.citation: Am J Psychiatry. 2002 Apr;159(4):585-91
references.pmid: 11925296
references.citation: J Gastrointest Cancer. 2008;39(1-4):100-3
references.pmid: 19127451
references.citation: Lancet. 2004 Oct 16-22;364(9443):1421-7
references.pmid: 15488217
references.citation: Am J Psychiatry. 2004 May;161(5):797-806
references.pmid: 15121642
references.citation: Neurology. 2005 Nov 8;65(9):1395-401
references.pmid: 16275826
references.citation: Arch Neurol. 2003 Aug;60(8):1119-22
references.pmid: 12925369
references.citation: Fed Regist. 1996 Oct 2;61(192):51498-533
references.pmid: 10161558
references.citation: Chest. 2009 Apr;135(4):1061-1068
references.pmid: 19349401
references.citation: J Pediatr. 1981 May;98(5):842-6
references.pmid: 7229775
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2002 May 2;346(18):1405-8
references.pmid: 11986418
references.citation: Neurology. 2003 Dec 23;61(12):1649-51
references.pmid: 14694024
references.citation: Ann Surg. 2009 Jan;249(1):173-8
references.pmid: 19106695
references.citation: Fed Regist. 1979 Apr 18;44(76):23191-7
references.pmid: 10241035
references.citation: Intensive Care Med. 2003 Jun;29(6):1024-5
references.pmid: 12861989
references.citation: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001 Feb;49(2):172-8
references.pmid: 11207872