Ethical Assessment and Reflection in Research and Development of Non-Conformité Européene Marked Medical Devices
Today there are multiple implantable medical devices on the market. The type of implants that interface the body’s tissues has been considered to have particular strong ethical implications. This article describes a development of a novel practice for ethical assessment and reflection within medical...
| Autori: | ; |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Caricamento...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Pubblicazione: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
2020
|
| In: |
Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Anno: 2020, Volume: 29, Fascicolo: 4, Pagine: 592-606 |
| Altre parole chiave: | B
Action Research
B research ethics B biotechnology ethics B Neuroethics |
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Riepilogo: | Today there are multiple implantable medical devices on the market. The type of implants that interface the body’s tissues has been considered to have particular strong ethical implications. This article describes a development of a novel practice for ethical assessment and reflection within medical device research and development of non-CE marked medical devices, taking the perspective of both the ethicist and the researcher. The research case was an EU funded project where the aim was to develop and compare the efficiency of invasive and non-invasive technological medical devices to create meaningful sensations as a novel therapy for phantom limb pain. An Independent Ethical Advisor (IEA) with a regulatory and advisory role was assigned to the project, allowing us to investigate the projects deliberate incorporation of ethics. In the article we suggest and applied a novel framework based on action research for combining ethical assessment with building ethical reflection. The case analyse five different activities / elements: 1) the use of informed consent; 2) a survey amongst the research partners; 3) a workshop session; 4) observation of consortium meetings; and 5) an interview with a participating patient. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-2147 |
| Comprende: | Enthalten in: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0963180120000341 |