Background Resuscitation research requires an exception from informed consent (EFIC). Despite concerns that patients may find EFIC unacceptable, the views and experiences of patients enrolled in an EFIC study are largely unknown. Methods The Patients' Experience in Emergency Research (PEER) Study was nested within the Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial (RAMPART) for pre-hospital treatment of status epilepticus. PEER included 61 EFIC enrollees or their surrogates from 5 sites. Interviews used a structured, interactive guide focusing on acceptance of EFIC enrollment in RAMPART and existing regulatory protections. Simple statistics were generated, and textual data were analyzed for common themes. Results 24 enrolled patients and 37 surrogates were successfully interviewed. 49/60 (82%) were glad they or their family member were included in RAMPART; 54/57 (95%) felt research on emergency seizure treatment is important. 43/59 (73%) found their inclusion under EFIC acceptable;10 (17%) found it unacceptable, and 6 (10%) were neutral. There were no statistically significant interactions between enrollment attitudes and demographic characteristics, though there were trends toward lower acceptance among interviewees who were non-white, less educated, or had prior research experience. The most common concerns related to lack of consent prior to RAMPART enrollment. Positive responses related to perceived medical benefits, recognition of the impracticality of consent, and wanting doctors to do what needs to be done in emergencies. Many participants had difficulty understanding the trial and EFIC. Conclusions Most subjects had positive views of enrollment, and acceptance generally correlated with results of community consultation studies.

Objective To assess the range of responses to community consultation efforts conducted within a large network and the impact of different consultation methods on acceptance of exception from informed consent (EFIC) research and understanding of the proposed study. Design A cognitively pre-tested survey instrument was administered to 2,612 community consultation participants at 12 US centers participating in a multi-center trial of treatment for acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). Setting Survey nested within community consultation for a Phase III, randomized controlled trial of treatment for acute TBI conducted within a multi-center trial network and using EFIC. Subjects Adult participants in community consultation events. Interventions Community consultation efforts at participating sites. Measurements and Main Results Acceptance of EFIC in general, attitude toward personal EFIC enrollment, and understanding of the study content were assessed. 54% of participants agreed EFIC was acceptable in the proposed study; 71% were accepting of personal EFIC enrollment. Participants in interactive versus non-interactive community consultation events were more accepting of EFIC in general (63% vs. 49%) and personal EFIC inclusion (77% vs. 67%). Interactive community consultation participants had high-level recall of study content significantly more often than non-interactive consultation participants (77% vs. 67%). Participants of interactive consultation were more likely to recall possible study benefits (61% vs. 45%) but less likely to recall potential risks (56% vs. 69%). Conclusions Interactive community consultation methods were associated with increased acceptance of EFIC and greater overall recall of study information but lower recall of risks. There was also significant variability in EFIC acceptance among different interactive consultation events. These findings have important implications for IRBs and investigators conducting EFIC research and for community engagement efforts in research more generally.