(Circulation. 2008;118:1585-1592.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.
Special Report |
From the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa (S.A.T.); University of Washington, Seattle (J.L.P., P.J.K.); Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (T.A.S.); Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (T.P.A.); University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (J.S.); University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (D.C.); University of California, San Diego (D.K.); University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.M.); University of Alabama, Birmingham (T.B.); National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Md (G.S.); University of Iowa, Iowa City (R.K.); Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md (J.S.); and University of California, Irvine (D.H.).
Correspondence to Samuel A. Tisherman, MD, University of Pittsburgh, Departments of Surgery and Critical Care Medicine, 638 Scaife Hall, 3550 Terrace St, Pittsburgh, PA 15261. E-mail tishermansa@upmc.edu
Key Words: cardiopulmonary resuscitation hemorrhage shock trauma trials
An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract. |
| Introduction |
|---|
5%) despite medical advances.2 Traumatic injury, resulting in severe hemorrhagic shock or traumatic brain injury, is the leading cause of death in persons 1 to 44 years of age and is a leading cause of morbidity.3 For treatments to be effective in these life-threatening situations, they must be administered immediately, usually at the site of the event.4 Consequently, researchers and regulatory agencies find that typical standards for informed consent cannot be applied in the emergency setting. In 2004, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute organized the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) to conduct simultaneous prehospital studies of novel therapies for trauma and cardiac arrest. The consortium consists of 11 regional centers in the United States and Canada and a data coordinating center.
It was anticipated that these trials would require extra effort from a regulatory perspective because of the need to administer treatments during a relatively brief therapeutic window, making the standard practice of obtaining informed consent from the subjects before enrollment impossible. Because of the nature of the medical conditions being studied, the potential subjects would not be competent to consent. In addition, surrogate decision makers are not commonly available at the
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2008 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |