Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2008;118:1585-1592
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.764084
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Data Supplement
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tisherman, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tisherman, S. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow AHA Statements and Guidelines
Right arrow CPR and emergency cardiac care

(Circulation. 2008;118:1585-1592.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.


Special Report

Regulatory Challenges for the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium

Samuel A. Tisherman, MD; Judy L. Powell, BSN; Terri A. Schmidt, MD, MS; Tom P. Aufderheide, MD; Peter J. Kudenchuk, MD; Julie Spence, MD; Dixie Climer, RN, BSN, MBA; Donna Kelly, RN; Angela Marcantonio; Todd Brown, MD, MSPH; George Sopko, MD, MPH; Richard Kerber, MD; Jeremy Sugarman, MD, MPH, MA; David Hoyt, MD; the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Investigators

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
 
Resuscitation research is challenging but vital because few effective therapies exist for a number of life-threatening conditions. Cardiovascular disease has been a leading cause of death and morbidity in the United States. Although estimates vary, the American Heart Association estimates >150 000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests each year in the United States,1 with little improvement in survival ({approx}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 . . . [Full Text of this Article]