Advertisement

Ethical Consideration in Orthopedic Research

  • Jason L. Koh
  • Diego VillacisEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Concern for the ethics of human subject research has existed since the earliest days of scientific discovery. Respect for a participant’s well-being and autonomy is of utmost importance. From this early understanding of patient autonomy, further principles emerged, and in the modern era, this was further accelerated and formalized, particularly after revelation of atrocities committed by Nazi “scientists.” This leads to documents like the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Belmont Report, the formation of institutional review boards, and legislation passed by multiple legislatures, all in order to help ensure researchers abide by guiding principles of ethics. Specific to orthopedic surgery, there has been rising concern for conflict of interest due to the role of industry funding. The goals of this chapter are the following:
  • Understand the historical basis for the development of regulations and governing bodies reviewing human subject research.

  • Identify and understand ethical principles that guide human subject research.

  • Understand how to navigate the current regulatory environment for human subject research.

Keywords

Ethics Human subject research Orthopedic research 

References

  1. 1.
    American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Opinion on Ethics and Professionalism. Ethics in health research in orthopaedic surgery. Adopted October 1994. Revised December 1995, May 2002, July 2003, September 2005, and September 2016.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Assessing Level of Risk and Type of IRB Review. Research compliance news. University of South Alabama. 2008. www.southalabama.edu/research-compliance/pdf/compliancenews0908.pdf. Accessed 1 Feb 2018.
  3. 3.
    Brody B. The ethics of biomedical research. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown JG. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of Inspector General. Institutional review boards: their role in reviewing approved research. Office of Evaluations and Inspections; 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carr AJ. Which research is to be believed. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2005;87-B:1452–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clinical Research and the HIPAA Privacy Rule. NIH Publication Number 04-5495. 2004. http://privacyru-leandresearch.nih.gov/clin_research.asp. Accessed 29 Jan 2018.
  7. 7.
    Cobb WM. The tuskegee syphilis study. J Natl Med Assoc. 1973;65:345–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen J. History and ethics of human subjects research. Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative. CITI Program. 2017. Accessed 28 Jan 2018.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Declaration of Helsinki History Website. Ethical principles for medical research. JAMA Netw. Accessed 26 Feb 2018.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA. 2000;283:2701–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Friedman EA. Ethical issues in clinical research. In: Supino PG, Borer JS, editors. Principles of research methodology: a guide for clinical investigators. Ed 1 ed. New York: Springer; 2012. p. 233–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Public Law 104–191. 104th Congress. 1996. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ191/pdf/PLAW-104publ191.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2018.
  13. 13.
    Heller J. Syphilis victims in U.S. study went untreated for 40 years. New York Times (New York). 1972;1:8.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    The hippocratic oath: today. Doctors’ diaries. WGBH Educational Foundation. 1964. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html. Accessed 28 Jan 2018.
  15. 15.
    Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC. Is the placebo powerless? An analysis of clinical trials comparing placebo with no treatment. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1594–602. Erratum in: N Engl J Med;345:304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC. Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;3:CD003974.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    HSS. Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/summary/privacysummary.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2018.
  18. 18.
    International Committee of Clinical Journal Editors. Clinical Trials. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html. Accessed 27 Feb 2018.
  19. 19.
    Mazur DJ. Evaluating the science and ethics of research on humans: a guide for IRB members. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mehta S, Myers TG, Lonner JH, Huffman GR, Sennett BJ. The ethics of sham surgery in clinical orthopaedic research. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1650–3.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moseley JB, O’Malley K, Petersen NJ, Menke TJ, Brody BA, Kuykendall DH, Hollingsworth JC, Ashton CM, Wray NP. A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:81–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    NIH & Clinical Research. Ethics in Clinical Research. http://clinicalresearch.nih.gov/ethics_guides.html. Accessed 26 Jan 2018.
  23. 23.
    Nuremberg Code [from Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg, October 1946–April 1949. Washington, DC: U.S. G.P.O, 1949–1953].Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Official Journal of the European Union. Legislation L119. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AL%3A2016%3A119%3ATOC. Accessed 27 Feb 2018.
  25. 25.
    Owsei T, Temkin C. Ancient medicine. Selected papers of Ludwig Edelstein Johns. Baltimore: Hopkins University Press; 1987.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Public, Protection of Human Subjects, Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects, Title 45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A. 2005. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/45cfr46.html. Accessed 28 Jan 2018.
  27. 27.
    Shuster E. Fifty years later: the significance of the Nuremberg Code. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:1436–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sussman MD. Ethical requirements that must be met before the introduction of new procedures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;378:15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sussman MD. Ethical standards in the treatment of human subjects involved in clinical research. J Pediatr Orthop. 1998;18:701–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wolf BR, Buckwalter JA. Randomized surgical trials and “sham” surgery: relevance to modern orthopaedics and minimally invasive surgery. Iowa Orthop J. 2006;26:107–11.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISAKOS 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryNorthShore University Health SystemEvanstonUSA
  2. 2.Northshore Orthopedic InstituteEvanstonUSA
  3. 3.Pritzker School of Medicine, University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations