Resolving Ethical Challenges in Clinical Tests

Ethical Factors in Clinical Testing The conduct of the medics during their course of duty is regulated and governed by the established regulations relating to their profession. The basis of all these regulations is mainly to safeguard the rights of the patients. The patients must be accorded the utmost respect and handled in a dignified manner that makes them feel respected. It also covers what sort of equipment to be used in the case of an operation.

Besides, regulations in the medical fraternity also cover the conditions of the treatment facilities such as the hospitals. The level of hygiene among other conditions is put into consideration. This paper focuses on the ethical issues that surround the observation of patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea condition in the United States. This is a medical condition where a patient has difficulties breathing during sleep. However, it is unknown to these patients and can only be observed by those sleeping next to them.

The study will also suggest other ethical considerations that have not been included here, but which are of utmost importance. Basic requirements For a clinical test to be considered ethical, there are some basic requirements that the test must meet. These include proper sourcing of the consent from the party receiving the test, proper treatment of controlled subjects like children, and the just and voluntary subject selection. This also covers qualified investigators, scientific value and an independent review.

Each of these requirements holds a central position in an ethical testing regiment (Silverman 2007). Before any test can be done on the patient, consent from them must be duly obtained. The consent must spell the subject's desire and willingness to have the test done on him or her. It will also inform the patient of the dangers and risks that are likely to be encountered. In this regard, the consent becomes a binding agreement between the investigator and the subject.

The investigator is bound by the agreement to conduct the test to the best of his ability while the subject to cooperate and accept the results of this test. For the enrolled subjects like prisoners, fetuses or children, their case is peculiar. Nevertheless, they have to be accorded due consideration since it is the right. Given their ease of vulnerability, there are rules and regulations that bind and regulate the investigator in this case to fall within the required program.

There is also a requirement that the investigator work with more than one colleague when dealing with these enrolled subjects. It is common understanding that if left with no protection, the enrolled subjects can easily lose their rights at the hands of ill-intending investigators (Brown, et al., 2011). The selection of the subjects to be investigated has to be just and voluntary. Nobody should be coerced into accepting to have an investigation of OSA done on him or her.

The expression of willingness and voluntarism shall be gauged with the presence of a freely written expression of interest and a subsequent submission of the consent form by the patient. It is also a point to note that no investigation can be done on people who have a problem with undergoing the same. This is protected in yet another basic requirement: favorable risk-benefit ratio. The risk level subjected to the patient should match the level of benefit accrued from the exercise.

The medical practitioners must deduce and decide whether they find a plausible tradeoff between the two. One other important requirement for this test to be conducted is that the investigators have to be well trained with the requisite code of conduct with them. Poorly trained investigators will be costly to the exercise in two ways. One, they will come up with frivolous results that shall not be of any use. Secondly, they will likely violate the ethical requirements underlying research.

It is, therefore, mandatory to have well trained investigators before allowing the procedure to commence (Silverman 2007). In this article analyzed, the authors have stated the facts well. It is commendable that the authors have appreciated the necessary requirements for conducting testing. The authors have also ensured that there are sufficient explanations and rules concerning the conduct process. Reference to the statutes and laws governing this procedure as the Declaration of Helsinki as the authors used it fostered the elucidation of important points.

The authors have touched on virtually all the requirements for carrying out this procedure (Brown, et al., 2011). The main problem that.