International Research Ethics Experiences from Kenya in Bioethics : Equity, Informed Consent, and Community Participation in Research John E. Sidle, M. D. February 23, 2006
Background • IUSM and Moi University School of Medicine in Eldoret, Kenya have had a partnership since 1989. • Since 2001, the two universities have partnered in the Academic Model for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS (AMPATH). • AMPATH currently provides care to more than 20, 000 HIV/AIDS patients with a goal of treating over 50, 000 in western Kenya
Research • Collaborative research began in 1999 • Research projects have included medical informatics, bioethics, faculty development and evaluation, epidemiology, and health services research. • Most current collaborative research focuses on HIV/AIDS and covers epidemiology, effective delivery of care, TB and HIV, medical informatics, clinical trials, and research ethics.
Research Oversight • Collaborative research is reviewed at IU by the IRB • In Kenya, MUSOM has an Institutional Review and Ethics Committee (IREC) that reviews protocols and provides ethical oversight to both local and collaborative research projects. • The IREC holds an FWA with the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP)
Ethics Research • 2003—Shaffer , Tierney, Meslin, Greene, Yebei, Kimaiyo, Baliddawa, Sidle – Study of equity for patients participating in clinical trials. Examined the attitudes towards provision of post-trial benefits to patients involved in clinical trials – Consensus of decision-makers, researchers, and patients was that post-trial benefits should be provided (for life if possible, but for a minimum of 1 -2 years post-trial)
Ethics Research • 2004 -2005—Meslin, Sidle, Wools. Kaloustian, Were, Chuani • MOU established between the IRB and IREC to pursue cooperation in equity, informed consent, and Standard Operating Procedures • This project involved a needs assessment for implementation of the MOU
Community Participation • Individual identity and autonomy is not clear cut in Kenya. • Part of a person’s identity derives from their standing and role as part of the community • Proper involvement of community opinion leaders and “gatekeepers” is critical to the success of any community-based project
Community Participation • Community meetings (barazas) are needed to gain input from council members, chiefs, elders, and other community opinion leaders (e. g. traditional birth attendants) • Without the support of these leaders, many individuals will be unwilling to participate in the research • Community leaders should assist in the design of research to be sure that it is in keeping with community mores and practices.
Informed Consent • Verbal vs. written informed consent – Verbal consent culturally more appropriate, but written tends to be preferred by funders and Western researchers – How is informed consent handled when patient is illiterate, unfamiliar with the idea of research, is not fluent in English or Swahili • Individual informed consent—who decides? – Community issues – Spousal issues
Equity • Fair distribution of both benefits and risks across all groups – Patients: • How do we provide fair benefits during or after a trial without giving undue inducement for participation? • Is provision of community benefits sufficient, or must there always be benefits to the individual?
Equity – Researchers: How do benefits of conducting researchers compare between the team members (ie. salary, publications, promotion) – Institutions: Does each institution benefit in fair amounts from the research (e. g. indirect costs, equipment, infrastructure development)
Скачать презентацию International Research Ethics Experiences from Kenya in Bioethics
f41e05ee6de9a9fb61873d3715d1e857.ppt