Assessing Capacity to Consent for Research in Cognitively Impaired Older Patients

Overview

Journal Clin Interv Aging

Publisher Dove Medical Press

Specialty Geriatrics

Date 2017 Oct 14

PMID 29026293

Citations 23

Authors

Thomas Gilbert

Antoine Bosquet

Catherine Thomas-Anterion

Marc Bonnefoy

Olivia Le Saux

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The number of clinical trials including older patients, and particularly patients with cognitive impairment, is increasing. While statutory provisions exist to make sure that the capacity to consent is assessed systematically for each patient, many gray areas remain with regard to how this assessment is made or should be made in the routine practice of clinical research.

Objectives: The aim of this review was to draw up an inventory of assessment tools evaluating older patients' capacity to consent specifically applicable to clinical research, which could be used in routine practice.

Methods: Two authors independently searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar data-bases between November 2015 and January 2016. The search was actualized in April 2017. We used keywords (MeSH terms and text words) referring to informed consent, capacity to consent, consent for research, research ethics, cognitive impairment, vulnerable older patients, and assessment tools. Existing reviews were also considered.

Results: Among the numerous existing tools for assessing capacity to consent, 14 seemed potentially suited for clinical research and six were evaluated in older patients. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) was the most frequently cited.

Conclusion: The MacCAT-CR is currently the most used and the best validated questionnaire. However, it appears difficult to use and time-consuming. A more recent tool, the University of California Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC), seems interesting for routine practice because of its simplicity, relevance, and applicability in older patients.

Citing Articles

Modified Oral Health Assessment Tool (M-OHAT) for Residential Aged Care: A Co-Design Protocol.

Ferris L, Ludlow K, Walker N, Georgiou A, Henry J, Lopez Silva C Healthcare (Basel). 2024; 12(19).

PMID: 39408133 PMC: 11476239. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12191953.

Capacity to consent: a scoping review of youth decision-making capacity for gender-affirming care.

Marino L, Boguszewski K, Stephens H, Taylor J BMC Med Ethics. 2024; 25(1):108.

PMID: 39379955 PMC: 11459853. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-024-01107-y.

Person-centred quality indicators for Australian aged care assessment services: a mixed methods study.

Smith S, Travers C, Martin-Khan M, Webb I, Miller E, Thompson J Res Involv Engagem. 2024; 10(1):88.

PMID: 39143622 PMC: 11323374. DOI: 10.1186/s40900-024-00606-x.

Pragmatic phase II clinical trial to improve depression care in a real-world diverse MS cohort from an academic MS centre in Northern California: MS CATCH study protocol.

Henderson K, Reihm J, Koshal K, Wijangco J, Miller N, Sara N BMJ Open. 2024; 14(2):e077432.

PMID: 38401894 PMC: 10895222. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077432.

Cognitive determinants of decisional capacity in neurodegenerative disorders.

Portley M, Sherer C, Wu T, Farren J, Danielian L, Scholz S Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2023; 10(10):1816-1823.

PMID: 37545108 PMC: 10578892. DOI: 10.1002/acn3.51871.

References

Jeste D, Palmer B, Appelbaum P, Golshan S, Glorioso D, Dunn L . A new brief instrument for assessing decisional capacity for clinical research. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007; 64(8):966-74. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.64.8.966. View

Bean G, Nishisato S, Rector N, Glancy G . The assessment of competence to make a treatment decision: an empirical approach. Can J Psychiatry. 1996; 41(2):85-92. DOI: 10.1177/070674379604100205. View

Kraft S, Cho M, Constantine M, Lee S, Kelley M, Korngiebel D . A comparison of institutional review board professionals' and patients' views on consent for research on medical practices. Clin Trials. 2016; 13(5):555-65. PMC: 5025342. DOI: 10.1177/1740774516648907. View

Black B, Wechsler M, Fogarty L . Decision making for participation in dementia research. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013; 21(4):355-63. PMC: 3381948. DOI: 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.009. View

Kim S, Caine E, Currier G, LEIBOVICI A, Ryan J . Assessing the competence of persons with Alzheimer's disease in providing informed consent for participation in research. Am J Psychiatry. 2001; 158(5):712-7. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.158.5.712. View

Burgher Seaman J, Terhorst L, Gentry A, Hunsaker A, Parker L, Hagerty Lingler J . Psychometric Properties of a Decisional Capacity Screening Tool for Individuals Contemplating Participation in Alzheimer's Disease Research. J Alzheimers Dis. 2015; 46(1):1-9. PMC: 5036452. DOI: 10.3233/JAD-142559. View

Pucci E, Belardinelli N, Borsetti G, Rodriguez D, Signorino M . Information and competency for consent to pharmacologic clinical trials in Alzheimer disease: an empirical analysis in patients and family caregivers. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2001; 15(3):146-54. DOI: 10.1097/00002093-200107000-00006. View

Tam N, Huy N, Thoa L, Long N, Trang N, Hirayama K . Participants' understanding of informed consent in clinical trials over three decades: systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2015; 93(3):186-98H. PMC: 4371493. DOI: 10.2471/BLT.14.141390. View

Lepping P, Stanly T, Turner J . Systematic review on the prevalence of lack of capacity in medical and psychiatric settings. Clin Med (Lond). 2015; 15(4):337-43. PMC: 4952795. DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.15-4-337. View

10.

Porteri C, Andreatta C, Anglani L, Pucci E, Frisoni G . Understanding information on clinical trials by persons with Alzheimer's dementia. A pilot study. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2009; 21(2):158-66. DOI: 10.1007/BF03325224. View

11.

Karlawish J . Measuring decision-making capacity in cognitively impaired individuals. Neurosignals. 2007; 16(1):91-8. PMC: 2717553. DOI: 10.1159/000109763. View

12.

Lobo A, Launer L, Fratiglioni L, Andersen K, Di Carlo A, Breteler M . Prevalence of dementia and major subtypes in Europe: A collaborative study of population-based cohorts. Neurologic Diseases in the Elderly Research Group. Neurology. 2000; 54(11 Suppl 5):S4-9. View

13.

Wirshing D, Wirshing W, Marder S, Liberman R, Mintz J . Informed consent: assessment of comprehension. Am J Psychiatry. 1998; 155(11):1508-11. DOI: 10.1176/ajp.155.11.1508. View

14.

Moye J, Karel M, Gurrera R, Azar A . Neuropsychological predictors of decision-making capacity over 9 months in mild-to-moderate dementia. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21(1):78-83. PMC: 1484610. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00288.x. View

15.

De Vries R, Ryan K, Stanczyk A, Appelbaum P, Damschroder L, Knopman D . Public's approach to surrogate consent for dementia research: cautious pragmatism. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013; 21(4):364-72. PMC: 3357450. DOI: 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.010. View

16.

Traykov L, Rigaud A, Cesaro P, Boller F . [Neuropsychological impairment in the early Alzheimer's disease]. Encephale. 2007; 33(3 Pt 1):310-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0013-7006(07)92044-8. View

17.

Feinberg L, Whitlatch C . Are persons with cognitive impairment able to state consistent choices?. Gerontologist. 2001; 41(3):374-82. DOI: 10.1093/geront/41.3.374. View

18.

Appelbaum P, Roth L . Competency to consent to research: a psychiatric overview. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1982; 39(8):951-8. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1982.04290080061009. View

19.

Welie S . Criteria for patient decision making (in)competence: a review of and commentary on some empirical approaches. Med Health Care Philos. 2001; 4(2):139-51. DOI: 10.1023/a:1011493817051. View

20.

Moye J, Sabatino C, Brendel R . Evaluation of the capacity to appoint a healthcare proxy. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013; 21(4):326-36. PMC: 4859336. DOI: 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.09.001. View