Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T19:35:06.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

19 - Research on human subjects

from Part IV - Ethics in special contexts: biomedical research, genetics, and organ transplantation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

John C. Moskop
Affiliation:
Wake Forest University, North Carolina
Get access

Summary

Case example

Mr. Simpson, a high school biology teacher, is a community member of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at University Medical Center (UMC), the nearby academic medical center. (US federal regulations require that health care institutions establish IRBs to review and approve all publicly funded biomedical research on human subjects conducted at the institution.) At today's meeting of the UMC IRB, members are considering a research proposal entitled “Angina Pain Relief and Outcome Network Study,” or APRONS. Dr. Russell, Professor of Cardiology, explains that APRONS is a proposed multi-institution clinical trial of treatments for patients with stable coronary artery disease (narrowing of the arteries of the heart), and that he will be the lead investigator of this study at UMC. The study intends to enroll as research subjects more than 2000 patients with this condition over a period of three years. Patient-subjects will be randomly assigned to receive one of the following three interventions:

  1. Optimal medical (drug) therapy to relieve angina (severe chest pain caused by inadequate blood supply to the heart) and to control progression of the disease.

  2. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), also called coronary angioplasty – a procedure in which a clinician feeds a catheter (a flexible tubular instrument) from an artery in the patient's leg through the blood vessels into an artery of the heart, then inflates a balloon to dilate that artery. When the balloon inflates, it implants an expandable wire mesh tubular device, called a stent, inside the artery. The expanded stent remains in the artery to keep it open. Subjects in this group will receive optimal drug therapy after PCI.

  3. Sham PCI – a similar procedure in which a clinician feeds a catheter from an artery in the patient's leg through the blood vessels into an artery of the heart, but then removes the catheter without any additional intervention. Subjects in this group will receive optimal drug therapy after the sham procedure.

Patient-subjects in groups two and three will not be told which of the two procedures they have received until the study is completed. All study subjects will receive identical counseling and support for lifestyle changes to prevent disease progression, including smoking cessation, exercise, and diet.

Type
Chapter
Information
Ethics and Health Care
An Introduction
, pp. 265 - 284
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beecher, Henry K. 1966. Ethics and clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 274: 1354–1360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emanuel, Ezekiel J., Grady, Christine C., Crouch, Robert A., et al. (eds.) 2008. The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Jay, Capron, Alexander, and Glass, Eleanor Swift (eds.) 1972. Experimentation with Human Beings. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Levine, Robert J. 1988. Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research. edition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1978. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Research on human subjects
  • John C. Moskop, Wake Forest University, North Carolina
  • Book: Ethics and Health Care
  • Online publication: 05 February 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139058575.024
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Research on human subjects
  • John C. Moskop, Wake Forest University, North Carolina
  • Book: Ethics and Health Care
  • Online publication: 05 February 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139058575.024
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Research on human subjects
  • John C. Moskop, Wake Forest University, North Carolina
  • Book: Ethics and Health Care
  • Online publication: 05 February 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139058575.024
Available formats
×