49
Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Dr. S. ManikandanAssistant Professor of Pharmacology

JIPMER, Pondicherry.

Research Ethics

Page 2: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

1. What is medical ethics?

2. History of biomedical ethics

3. Principles of ethics

4. Informed consent

5. Assessing risk and harm

6. Implications of justice and equality

Page 3: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

What is health research?

A biomedical activity that entails systematic collection and analysis of data with the intention to generate new knowledge in which humans are exposed to new interventions.

Page 4: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Practice Vs Research

Medical practice – best known methods / medicines should be used while treating.

Research – Unproven and risky new interventions are used.

Is this justifiable?

By following certain guiding principles that can protect the participants

Page 5: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Medical Ethics

The study of a moral ideals, rules and codes of conduct

that govern behavior of medical professionals. (Grenz & Smith, 2003)

Is there any difference between ethics and morals?

Ethics - Greek word; moral - Latin word for the same idea.

Strictly, ‘ethics’ refers to a set of principles, whereas ‘morals’

refers to individual behavior and often has emotional

component.

Page 6: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

History of Biomedical Ethics

Page 7: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Romanian Gypsy in Potable Seawater, Hypothermia & High Altitude Experiments at Dachau

Nazi Experiments on Jews – cont…

Page 8: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

15 of 23 guilty, 7 hanged, 5 life sentences

Nuremberg Code (1947) – An international statement on the ethics of medical research on humans

Nuremberg Code (1947) – An international statement on the ethics of medical research on humans

Dr. Leo Alexander with Survivor of Experiments at Ravensbrueck

Defendants and Defense Counsel

Page 9: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Tuskegee Study “Bad Blood” 1932-1972

28 deaths 100 cases of disability 19 cases of congenital Syphilis

Page 10: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Apology 65 years late

Herman Shaw, study participant

Page 11: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Research Ethics Milestones*

Trigger Events Ethics Milestones

*Syphilis Study Begins *The Nazi Experiments *Human Radiation Experiments Nuremberg Code 1947 *The Thalidomide Tragedy

Amendments to the Food, Drug, Cosmetic Act 1962

*Milgram Study Declaration of

Helsinki 1964 Belmont

Report 1979

Page 12: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Principles of Ethics

Autonomy Beneficence & Non-maleficence

Justice & Equality

Page 13: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Autonomy

Ability of a person to make his or her own decision

How is this principle implemented?

By obtaining full written informed consent

Page 14: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Components of Informed Consent

Voluntary participation.

Option to withdraw at any time.

Right to services.

Privacy and confidentiality.

Explanation in lay terms in regional language

Page 15: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Privacy & Confidentiality

Privacy

Right of study participants to decide the extent to which there is access to their personal data.

Confidentiality

Preservation of the participants anonymity when handling data during research and publication.

Page 16: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Informed Consent Form (ICF)

Has two parts.

Part 1 – Participant information sheet.

Part 2 – Signed document.

Adequate time should be provided for the participants to read, think and decide, before signing the document.

Page 17: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Elements of ICF – Part 1

Nature & purpose of study.

Complete procedure – Inc. & Exc. criteria, investigations, interventions, duration, follow up, etc.

Foreseeable risks and benefits.

Storage period of biological samples & data.

Compensation

Contact details of P.I. & Chairman of IEC

Page 18: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Elements of ICF – Part 2

Explains participation is voluntary.

Can withdraw from study at any time without loss of routine patient care.

Voluntarily agree to participate in the study after knowing the risks and benefits

Signatures of participant & witness. (At least one should be a signature)

Page 19: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Waiver of Consent

When participant & researcher does not come into contact.

Research involving not more than minimal risk.

Minimal Risk

Harm or discomfort not greater than that encountered in routine daily life activities of general population or during the performance of routine physical or psychological examination/tests.

Waiver of informed consent should be decided by the ethics committee and NOT by the investigator.

Page 20: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Re-consent

When investigator deviates from protocol.

When a participant regains consciousness from unconscious state or becomes mentally competent.

Page 21: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Informed Consent in Children

Parent / legally accepted representative (LAR) should sign consent.

Assent of child should also be obtained (mandatory for child

> 7 years; advisable for all children).

If child refuses to participate, the consent of parent/LAR becomes invalid.

Page 22: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 1

A study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of an analgesic. The investigator approached the head of a remote village and explained all the details of the study. The head of the village instructed that one person from every house should participate in the study.(Everyone in this

village obeys the chief in all matters) The investigator recruited these people and completed the study.

The investigator’s friend feels that he was unethical. The investigator argues that he has explained all the details completely to the village head and hence was right.

Did the investigator violate any principle(s) of ethics?

Page 23: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 2

Research was undertaken to evaluate the quality of care in family welfare program. Investigators wanted to interview all healthcare workers in PHC. IEC recommended that all information that could lead to identification of specific PHC should be avoided. An investigator noticed a health worker is reusing disposable needles. Without mentioning the name, the investigator reported this to the supervisor. A week later he observed that the health worker is still reusing the needles and nothing has been done. He knows that confidentiality to the clinic and its workers was assured.

Should the principle of confidentiality be strictly upheld in this case?

Page 24: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

When can identity be revealed?

When there is a threat to a person’s life (e.g. infant fed with dirty water, child abuse, needle being reused).

Risk to public health (e.g. diagnosis of contagious disease).

In court of law when ordered by a judge.

Page 25: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 3

The Head of the Department of Pharmacology wanted to conduct a bioavailability study for a new drug. He asked the undergraduate (3rd and 4th semester) students and pharmacology PGs to participate in the study as healthy volunteers. Written informed consent was obtained from all volunteers.

Are there any ethical issues involved in this study?

Page 26: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Vulnerable Population & Diminished Autonomy

People who lack decision making capacity.

Patients of questionable capacity.

People having decision making capability but vulnerable because of culture, disease or inability to speak.

They have a diminished autonomy.

Justified only if the research is responsive to the health needs or priorities of this group and it cannot be carried out in a nonvulnerable group. (Declaration of Helsinki)

Page 27: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Vulnerable Population & Diminished Autonomy

Orphans, prisoners.

Mentally challenged.

Tribals.

Students.

Pregnant women & children.

Page 28: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Beneficence

To act in a way that benefits the patient.

Nonmaleficence

Obligation not to inflict harm intentionally.

In medical practice, the most important tenet (primum non nocere)

Difficult to comply by, as almost all interventions have some adverse effect.

Hence need to weigh the risks and benefits.

Page 29: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Are research benefits and harm fairly distributed?

Research raises concern when the knowledge obtained does not serve participants best interest.

When research coincides with participants interest they are usually unproblemistic.

Research should be in line with national priorities and sensitive to social, cultural and economic context of the region.

Page 30: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

How to maximize benefits?

1. Good study design

Improperly designed study cannot yield any benefit.

Rather can harm the participants.

Hence it is unethical to carry out a study with flaws in design.

Page 31: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

How to maximize benefits? Cont…

Issues in study design

Less sample size and hence results are invalid.

Inappropriate selection criteria, incomplete blinding.

Subclinical doses of the comparator drug.

End points chosen to favour the test arm.

Page 32: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 4

A drug company wanted to test a new antiepileptic and contacted a neurologist. It was proposed to administer the new drug to one group of epilepsy patients and placebo to another group of epilepsy patients. The neurologist was hesitant to use placebo, but the company assured him that the primary aim of this study is to establish the safety of new drug and not evaluation of efficacy. Hence comparing with a placebo is more appropriate for such studies. The neurologist agreed to this and undertook the study.

Are there any ethical issues involved in this study?

Page 33: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

How to maximize benefits? – cont…

2. Use of placebo

Effectiveness of a new intervention must be tested against the best proven intervention.

Where no proven intervention exists, the use of placebo or no intervention is acceptable. (Declaration of Helsinki)

Placebo or no intervention is justifiable, if it does not lead to additional risk or irreversible harm. (Declaration of Helsinki)

Page 34: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 5

A drug company from Europe conducted a clinical trial (with three years follow up) for a new antiretroviral drug in Africa. After two years, the interim analysis clearly showed that the new drug is very effective. The drug company stopped the trial, filed application for approval of the new drug in Europe. Later the drug was made available in Europe but not in Africa.

Are there any ethical issues involved in this study?

Page 35: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

How to maximize benefits? – cont…

3. Benefits after trial (Post trial access)

At the end of trial every participant should be assured of access to the best proven prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic methods identified by the study. (Declaration of Helsinki)

Rationale – The patient has voluntarily taken the risk and has aided in the development of this drug. Hence he should be supplied the drug free of cost. Moreover, harm might be inflicted if we withdraw the drug.

Page 36: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Nonmaleficence

1. Professional Competency

Investigator should be competent enough to do the various procedures involved in research.

Should have good knowledge about research methodology.

Page 37: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 6

Ayusoft, an Ayurveda company approached a famous cardiologist to conduct a trial for their new ayurvedic drug for angina. Approval was obtained from the Independent Ethics Committee and after this the cardiologist obtained full written informed consent from all the participants and completed the study successfully.

Did the cardiologist violate any principle(s) of ethics?

Page 38: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Incompetency can lead to maleficence

It would neither be ethical nor morally justifiable if an allopathic physician carries out clinical evaluation of a plant product without any concept or training in these systems of medicine (ICMR Guidelines 2006, p. 55).

It is essential that such clinical trials be carried out only when a competent Ayurveda, Siddha or Unani physician is a coinvestigator (ICMR Guidelines 2006, p. 55).

Page 39: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Nonmaleficence – cont…

2. Compensation for participation

Can be paid for the time spent, expenses incurred for participation in research.

When a participant withdraws for any reason, he should be paid a proportionate amount.

This compensation cannot be termed as benefit.

The amount should be approved by the ethics committee.

Page 40: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Nonmaleficence – cont…

3. Compensation for injury

Participants who suffer physical injury during research are entitled for financial and medical assistance.

In a clinical trial conducted for regulatory approval, this is an obligation of the sponsor.

An Arbitration Committee or Appellate Authority could be setup to decide the issue of compensation on a case by case basis.

Participants should not be asked to waive their right to compensation.

Page 41: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Justice and Equality

Treat people fairly.

Fair sharing of burdens and benefits of research.

An injustice occurs when:

Benefits to which a person is entitled are denied without good reason.

Burdens are imposed unduly.

Page 42: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Buzz 7

A drug company conducted a multinational, multicentric, clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of a new drug for a metabolic disease. For the sites in USA & Europe, the new drug was compared with the drug that is already available in these countries. Placebo was used as a comparator for the sites in Africa. Some investigators in Africa objected to this. The drug company argued that there is no drug available for this disease in Africa and hence the use of placebo in these sites is justified. It also stated that if this trial is done in Africa, this new drug will be introduced and their patients will be benefitted

Did the drug company violate any principle(s) of ethics?

Page 43: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Not publishing your research is unethical

Researchers have ethical obligations with regard to the publication and dissemination of the results of research.

Researchers have a duty to make publicly available the results of their research on human subjects and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. (Declaration of Helsinki, 2013).

Page 44: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Summary

Autonomy, beneficence & nonmaleficence, justice and equality are the three tenets of ethics.

Informed consent should be obtained from all patients.

Voluntariness, option to withdraw at any time, right to services, privacy and confidentiality are components of informed consent.

Unethical to carry out a research with flaws in study design.

Incompetency of the researcher can lead to maleficence.

Page 45: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Historical Movies on Ethics to Watch

Page 46: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

‘Toons on (Un)Ethical Dilemma

Page 47: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

It is an ethical dilemma now. We have solved the problem but have two years of funding through our research grant

Page 48: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Give the new drug to rich patients and placebo to the poor. No sense getting their hopes up. They wouldn’t be able to afford even if it works.

Page 49: Dr. S. Manikandan Assistant Professor of Pharmacology JIPMER, Pondicherry. Research Ethics

Our scientists say it would be a public health hazard. But our market research shows it would sell like hot cakes. What do you think?