• J R Maltby and C J Eagle.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Foothills Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
• Can J Anaesth. 1993 Sep 1;40(9):891-6.

AbstractMost surgical patients are first seen by an anaesthetist after admission to hospital, either the evening before or on the day of surgery. Some medical ethicists believe that an approach by an anaesthesia researcher made after admission is unethical because the hospital itself is a coercive environment, and patients have insufficient time for reflection or consultation. Others believe that an approach prior to admission may be an invasion of the patient's privacy and confidentiality. The implications of these views for anaesthesia researchers may not be apparent to research ethics boards (REBs). To determine current practice, a questionnaire concerning the membership and function of REBs and the time of obtaining informed consent was sent to each research representative of the 16 Canadian university departments of anaesthesia. Membership of REBS was similar, but not identical, in all centres. Most representation was from medical disciplines. Consent was generally obtained following the patient's admission to hospital. In one centre, the REB always requested informed consent to be obtained before the patient's admission to the hospital. Surgeons had no involvement with consent for anaesthesia research in 14 centres while in the other two they gave permission for their patients to be studied and informed patients of the potential approach by anaesthesia researchers. We conclude that it is ethically acceptable to obtain informed consent for most low-risk clinical anaesthesia research after the patient's admission to hospital.

25 keywords...

hide…