You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 300 No. 15, October 15, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letter
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Medical Practice
 •Law and Medicine
 •Medical Ethics
 •Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine
 •Adult Critical Care
 •Quality of Care
 •Quality of Care, Other
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Informed Consent and Studies of a Quality Improvement Program—Reply

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: In response to Dr Lemaire, Edusepsis is a clinical research study of quality improvement. Quality improvement is an intrinsic part of good clinical care, in which data from clinicians' own settings guide them in improving their practices. However, ethical issues arise because attempts to improve quality may inadvertently cause harm. The Edusepsis study was completely evaluated by the independent research ethics committees of participating hospitals.

There were several reasons for not requiring participants to provide informed consent. First, from the patients' point of view, the study was observational because no intervention on the patients was involved; the educational intervention involved only physicians and nurses. Second, patients' participation was completely anonymous. Third, we did not include a control group in whom the educational intervention was withheld. Although this would have strengthened our conclusions, it would have introduced some ethical ambiguities. Fourth, all consecutive patients in the different periods of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Ricard Ferrer, MD
rferrer@tauli.cat

Antonio Artigas, MD, PhD
Hospital de Sabadell
CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias
Barcelona, Spain

Mitchell Levy, MD, FCCM
Rhode Island Hospital
Providence



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Improvement in Process of Care and Outcome After a Multicenter Severe Sepsis Educational Program in Spain
, , , , , , , , , , and
JAMA. ;299():2294-2303.
FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTER

Informed Consent and Studies of a Quality Improvement Program

JAMA. ;300():1762-1762.
FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.