Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-fnl2l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-20T10:06:15.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

546 Improving the compliance of informed consent documentation for expanded access patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2025

Elias Samuels
Affiliation:
Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
Misty Gravelin
Affiliation:
Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
Ellen Champagne
Affiliation:
Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
Dorsa Haj Ghaffari
Affiliation:
Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
Jeanne Wright
Affiliation:
Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Objectives/Goals: The informed consent (IC) process is similar between clinical trials and expanded access (EA), which allows clinical use of investigational products outside studies. Physicians face unique barriers to IC in clinical environments. This project assesses IC documentation, identifies potential barriers, and evaluates efforts to improve compliance. Methods/Study Population: This is a continuous quality improvement project. To assess the compliance of IC processes for EA patients, informed consent documents signed by EA patients in 2023 were collected and reviewed against institutional standards. Five components of each form were evaluated, and the number and type of noncompliant documentation were tracked. Five physicians who provided EA treatments in 2023 were interviewed and the transcripts were analyzed to identify barriers to physician’s and teams’ IC processes. Efforts made to address these barriers and improve the compliance of informed consent documentation are being tracked and trends in compliance are being evaluated. Results/Anticipated Results: Sixty seven (67) signed informed consent documents for EA treatments were systematically reviewed and 34% were found to be compliant in all key aspects assessed. Analyses of interview notes, transcripts, and memos identified barriers to informed consent processes for expanded access treatments, including the infrequent or irregular occurrence of EA treatments making it difficult for care teams to develop and maintain their understanding of IC process and resources. Efforts made to improve compliance by pre-populating available information into informed consent documentation and removing unnecessary boxes in these forms may have driven improvement in compliance with further efforts underway. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This project evaluated the compliance of IC documentation for EA treatments and identified drivers affecting physicians’ IC processes for these patients. Different strategies to improve the compliance of IC documentation were evaluated and potential best practices for EA support were identified.

Type
Regulatory Science
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science