Abstract
In the current epidemic of opioid use disorders, there is both a scientific and ethical imperative to develop effective medical and behavioral treatments for opioid addiction. Research in subject populations with active and ongoing drug addictions bring unique ethical considerations and challenges. Sponsors, researchers, and institutional review board (IRB) members should be familiar with these unique ethical and medical issues as they design, review, and conduct research planned for this population. Issues include those of informed consent and decision-making capacity of research participants, compensation for participation and concerns about undue inducement, forces that threaten the voluntary nature of research participation including the scarcity of available drug treatment programs, and ensuring that participants are aware of and understand risks that may continue after research participation such as increased risk of overdose after research-mandated drug abstinence. This manuscript discusses the current thinking on these issues.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bell K, Salmon A. Good intentions and dangerous assumptions: research ethics committees and illicit drug use research. Res Ethics. 2012;8:191–199.
Anderson EE, Dubois JM. The need for evidence-based research ethics: a review of the substance abuse literature. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006;86:95–105.
Geppert C, Bogenschutz MP. Pharmacological research on addictions: a framework for ethical and policy considerations. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2009;41:49–60.
America’s opioid epidemic and its effect on the nation’s commercially-insured population. Blue Cross blue shield. https://www.bcbs.com/the-health-of-america/reports/americas-opioid-epidemic-and-its-effect-on-the-nations-commercially-insured.
NIDA. Long-term follow-up of medication-assisted treatment for addiction to pain relievers yields “cause for optimism.” National Institute on Drug Abuse website. https://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2015/11/long-term-follow-up-medication-assisted-treatment-addiction-to-pain-relievers-yields-cause-optimism. Published November 30, 2015. Accessed September 14, 2017.
Fischer B, Oviedo-Joekes E, Blanken P, et al. Heroin-assisted Treatment (HAT) a decade later: a brief update on science and politics. J Urban Health. 2007;84:552–562.
Kirshenbaum AP, Olsen DM, Bickel WK. A quantitative review of the ubiquitous relapse curve. J Subst Abuse Treatment. 2009;36:8–17.
NIH U.S. National Library of Medicine. ClinicaTrials.gov. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=opioid+addiction&Search=Apply&recrs=b&recrs=a&recrs=f&recrs=d&age_v=&gndr=&type=&rslt=. Accessed September 14, 2017.
Brooner RK, King VL, Kidorf M, Schmidt CW, Bigelow GE. Psychiatric and substance use comorbidity among treatment-seeking opioid abusers. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1997;54:71–80.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Bethesda, MD: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; 1979.
Moran-Sanchez I, Luna A, Sanchez-Munoz M, Aguilera-Alcaraz B, Perez-Carceles MD. Decision-making capacity for research participation among addicted people: A cross-sectional study. BMC Med Ethics. 2016;17:1–10.
Loue S, Ioan B. Legal and ethical issues in heroin diagnosis, treatment, and research. J Legal Med. 2007;28:193–221.
Luebbert R, Tait RC, Chibnall JT, Deshields TL. IRB member judgments of decisional capacity, coercion, and risk in medical and psychiatric studies. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008;3:15–24.
Jeste DV, Saks E. Decisional capacity in mental illness and substance use disorders: empirical database and policy implications. Behav Sci Law. 2006;24:607–628.
College on Problems of Drug Dependence. Special report: human subject issues in drug abuse research. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1995;37:167–175.
Carter A, Hall W. Informed consent to opioid agonist maintenance treatment: recommended ethical guidelines. Int J Drug Policy. 2008;19:79–89.
Nishimura A, Carey J, Erwin PJ, Tilburt JC, Murad MH, McCormick JB. Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials. BMC Med Ethics 2013;14:28.
Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants’ understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004;292:1593–1601.
National Center for Education Statistics. 2005. A First Look at the Literacy of America’s Adults in the 21st Century: National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Fisher CB, Oransky M, Mahadevan M, Singer M, Mirhej G, Hodge D. Marginalized populations and drug addiction research: realism, mistrust, and misconception. IRB. 2008;30:1–9.
Largent E, Lynch HF. Paying research participants: The outsized influence of “undue influence.” IRB. 2017;39:1–9.
Fry CL, Hall W, Ritter A, Jenkinson R. The ethics of paying drug users who participate in research: a review and practical recommendations. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006;1:21–36.
Volkow ND, Koob GF, McLellan AT. Neurobiologic advances from the brain disease model of addiction. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:363–371.
Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Dugosh KL, Croft JR, Arabia PL. Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow-up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005;96:128–135.
Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Croft JR, et al. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;78:275–281.
Barratt MJ, Norman JS, Fry CL. Positive and negative aspects of participating in illicit drug research: implications for recruitment and ethical conduct. Int J Drug Policy. 2007;18:235–238.
Fry CL, Dwyer R. For love or money? An exploratory study of why injecting drug users participate in research. Addiction. 2001;96:1319–1325.
Wright S, Klee H, Reid P. Interviewing illicit drug users: observations from the field. Addiction Research. 1998;6:517–535.
Roux P, Tindall C, Fugon L, et al. Impact of inpatient research participation on subsequent heroin use patterns: implications for ethics and public health. Addiction. 2012;107:642–649.
Dominguez A, Jawara M, Martino N, Sinaii N, Grady C. Commonly performed procedures in clinical research: a benchmark for payment. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012;33:860–868.
DuVal G, Salmon C. Research note: ethics of drug treatment research with court-supervised subjects. J Drug Issues. 2004;:991–1005.
Jones CM, Campopiano M, Baldwin G, McCance-Katz E. National and state treatment need and capacity for opioid agonist medication-assisted treatment. Am J Public Health. 2015;105:e55–e63.
Hser Y, Mooney LJ, Saxon AJ, et al. High mortality among patients with opioid use disorder in a large healthcare system. J Addict Med. 2017;11:315–319.
Strang J, McCambridge J, Best D, et al. Loss of tolerance and overdose mortality after inpatient opiate detoxification: follow up study. BMJ. 2003;326:959–960.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Anderson, E., McNair, L. Ethical Issues in Research Involving Participants With Opioid Use Disorder. Ther Innov Regul Sci 52, 280–284 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479018771682
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479018771682