The Random Dialing Survey as a Tool for Community Consultation for Research Involving the Emergency Medicine Exception From Informed Consent
Study objective
In 1996, the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services enacted rules allowing a narrow exception from informed consent for critically ill patients enrolled in emergency research. These include requirements for community consultation prior to trial implementation. Previous studies have noted difficulty in engaging the community. We seek to describe the experience with random dialing surveys as a tool for community consultation across 5 metropolitan regions in the United States.
Methods
Random dialing surveys were used as part of the community consultation for an out-of-hospital clinical trial sponsored by the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium. The survey method was designed to obtain a representative sample of the community according to population demographics and geography. Logistics of survey administration, role of the survey in community consultation, and survey results by population demographics are discussed.
Results
Random dialing surveys were conducted in 5 of 8 US Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium sites. Overall, 70% to 79% of respondents indicated they would be willing to be enrolled in this study. Support for the inclusion of children (aged 15 to 18 years) ranged from 52% to 71%. Respondents aged 18 to 34 years were more willing to participate in the trial than older age groups. Women and racial minorities were less likely to favor the inclusion of minors.
Conclusion
Random dialing surveys provide an additional tool to engage the community and obtain a sample of the opinion of the population about research conducted under the emergency exception from informed consent regulations. Similar results were obtained across 5 diverse communities in the United States.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supervising editor: Theodore R. Delbridge, MD, MPH
Author contributions: All authors were involved in conception and design of the study and data acquisition. EMB was responsible for data analysis and primary drafting of the article. AJC provided statistical support for data analysis. TAS, AJC, KJB, DEG, PJK, DD, BB, AHI, and TPA contributed to critical revision of the article. EMB takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. This study was supported by a cooperative agreement (5U01 HL077863) with the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute in partnership with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)–Institute of Circulatory and Respiratory Health, Defense Research and Development Canada, and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.
Publication dates: Available online September 27, 2008.
Reprints not available from the authors.
PII: S0196-0644(08)01512-6
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.07.021
© 2008 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Refers to article:
- Community Consultation by Randomly Reaching Out to the Community , 05 November 2008
