Motivations for people with cognitive impairment to complete an advance research directive – a qualitative interview study

Author:

Jongsma KarinORCID,Perry Julia,Schicktanz Silke,Radenbach Katrin

Abstract

Abstract Background Research with persons with dementia is important to better understand the causes of dementia and to develop more effective diagnostics, therapies, and preventive measures. Advance Research Directives (ARDs) have been suggested as a possible solution to include persons with dementia in research in an ethically sound way. Little is known about how people, especially those affected by cognitive impairment, understand and regard the use of ARDs, as empirical studies are mainly conducted with healthy, non-cognitively impaired, participants. Methods This qualitative study, a sub-study of a larger study on the evaluation of ARDs in the context of dementia research in Germany, consists of semi-structured in-depth interviews with 24 persons with cognitive impairment. Results Our results indicate that most participants consider ARDs a valuable tool for allowing them to make their own decisions. Many would prefer to draft an ARD when they are still healthy or soon after the diagnosis of cognitive impairment. Participants suggested that the completion of ARDs can be advanced with the provision of practical support and increased dissemination of information on ARDs in society. Conclusion Persons with subjective or mild cognitive impairment (SCI/MCI) suggested several motivating factors and concerns for completing an ARD. Clinicians need to be trained to accommodate patients’ needs for sufficient and adequate information. Furthermore, a standardised, partly pre-formulated template could be helpful for drafting an ARD. As such tested templates are currently not yet available, this addresses the urgent need for more translational and implementation research for the use of ARDs.

Funder

the Research Funding Program of the University Medical Center Göttingen

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Reference34 articles.

1. World Medical Association (2013) Declaration of Helsinki on ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, as amended by the 64th WMA general assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/ [Accessed July 26, 2019].

2. European Parliament and Council Regulation on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/ EC. 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/files/eudralex/vol-1/reg_2014_536/reg_2014_536_en.pdf Accessed July 26 2019.

3. Kim SYK, Kim M, Ryan KA, et al. How important is accuracy of surrogate decision-making for research participation? PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54790.

4. Livingston G, Leavey G, Manela M, et al. Making decisions for people with dementia who lack capacity: qualitative study of family carers in UK. Br Med J. 2010;341:c4184.

5. Wendler D, Rid A. Systematic review: the effects on surrogates of making treatment decisions for others. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:336–46.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3