2006D-0331 Guidance for Institutional Review Boards, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors; Exception from Informed Consent Requirements for Emergency Research
FDA Comment Number : EC5
Submitter : Dr. Richard Dutton Date & Time: 09/11/2006 10:09:50
Organization : R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center
Category : Health Professional
Issue Areas/Comments
GENERAL
GENERAL
Public Hearing on the Conduct of Emergency Clinical Research, October 11, 2006, Food and Drug Administration

Abstract of Presentation

Presenter: Richard P. Dutton, MD MBA
Associate Professor, University of Maryland School of Medicine
Director, Trauma Anesthesiology, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center

Address: Division of Trauma Anesthesiology
Shock Trauma Center
University of Maryland Medical Center
22 South Greene Street
Baltimore, MD 21201

410-328-0125 (office)
410-328-3138 (fax)

Email: rdutton@umaryland.edu

Introduction: The protocols for emergency clinical research are of enormous importance to physician scientists working every day to save the lives of injured citizens. As one of those scientists I wish to share my experience with the Committee, and would be happy to make a brief oral presentation.

Content: I will speak briefly of my background and of my clinical and research experience in this arena. I have participated in the conduct or design of more than one dozen emergency clinical research protocols, and currently serve on the steering committee of two large multi-center trials that would like to use this mechanism. In addition, I will present pre-publication information we have collected at the Shock Trauma Center on the ability of trauma patients or their next of kin to provide consent for research studies. This prospectively gathered data, covering more than 2,000 trauma center admissions in the past 6 months, will provide a valuable insight into the actual nuts-and-bolts of emergency patient care and research.

Questions to be Addressed: My presentation will provide insight into question 2c (practicability of the emergency research measures), question 4 (other challenges, specifically brain injury, intoxication, and language barriers), question 5 (the feasibility of community consent mechanisms),
question 8 (the opt-out process), question 10 (the role of the IRB), and question 17 (how to motivate timely disclosure of results). I would be pleased to address any other topics that the Committee wishes, based on my experience in this field.