A randomised controlled trial of consent procedures for the use of residual tissues for medical research Preferences of and implications for patients, research and clinical practice

Open Access
Authors
  • S. Rebers
  • E. Vermeulen
  • A.P. Brandenburg
  • T.J. Stoof
  • B. Zupan-Kajcovski
  • W.J.W. Bos
  • M.J. Jonker
  • C.J. Bax
  • W.J. van Driel
  • V.J. Verwaal
  • M.W. van den Brekel ORCID logo
  • J.C. Grutters
  • R.A. Tupker
  • L. Plusjé
  • R. de Bree
  • J.H. Schagen van Leeuwen
  • E.G.J. Vermeulen
  • R.A. de Leeuw
  • R.M. Brohet
  • N.K. Aaronson
  • F.E. van Leeuwen
  • M.K. Schmidt
Publication date 30-03-2016
Journal PLoS ONE
Article number e0152509
Volume | Issue number 11 | 3
Number of pages 15
Organisations
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) - Psychology Research Institute (PsyRes)
Abstract
Background
Despite much debate, there is little evidence on consequences of consent procedures for residual tissue use. Here, we investigated these consequences for the availability of residual tissue for medical research, clinical practice, and patient informedness.

Methods
We conducted a randomised clinical trial with three arms in six hospitals. Participants, patients from whom tissue had been removed for diagnosis or treatment, were randomised to one of three arms: informed consent, an opt-out procedure with active information provision (opt-out plus), and an opt-out procedure without active information provision. Participants received a questionnaire six weeks post-intervention; a subsample of respondents was interviewed. Health care providers completed a pre- and post-intervention questionnaire. We assessed percentage of residual tissue samples available for medical research, and patient and health care provider satisfaction and preference. Health care providers and outcome assessors could not be blinded.

Results
We randomised 1,319 patients, 440 in the informed consent, 434 in the opt-out plus, and 445 in the opt-out arm; respectively 60.7%, 100%, and 99.8% of patients’ tissue samples could be used for medical research. Of the questionnaire respondents (N = 224, 207, and 214 in the informed consent, opt-out plus, and opt-out arms), 71%, 69%, and 31%, respectively, indicated being (very) well informed. By questionnaire, the majority (53%) indicated a preference for informed consent, whereas by interview, most indicated a preference for opt-out plus (37%). Health care providers (N = 35) were more likely to be (very) satisfied with opt-out plus than with informed consent (p = 0.002) or opt-out (p = 0.039); the majority (66%) preferred opt-out plus.

Conclusion
We conclude that opt-out with information (opt-out plus) is the best choice to balance the consequences for medical research, patients, and clinical practice, and is therefore the most optimal consent procedure for residual tissue use in Dutch hospitals.
Document type Article
Note Dutch Trial Register NTR2982
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152509
Downloads
S1CONSORTChecklist (Other version)
S1 Methods (Other version)
S1 Table (Other version)
S2 Table (Other version)
S3 Table (Other version)
S4 Table (Other version)
S5 Table (Other version)
S1 Protocol (Other version)
Permalink to this page
Back