A survey of fetal care centers in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Fetal care centers have recently emerged in affiliation with children's hospitals throughout the United States. Few studies have evaluated this new multidisciplinary model of care.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a survey of multidisciplinary fetal care centers in the United States; survey data was analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

59 centers were identified; 29 centers (49%) returned completed surveys. Most centers are located in a children's hospital (54%), and the majority of centers (76%) opened in the past 10 years. The majority of centers (62%) are administered by a specialist in Maternal Fetal Medicine or Obstetrics and Gynecology. A specialist in MFM or Ob/Gyn evaluates every patient at 90% of centers; a neonatologist evaluates every patient at 52% of centers. All responding centers have the capability to perform ultrasounds although fewer centers perform fetoscopic surgery (38%) or open fetal surgery (31%). Many centers (41%) conduct research protocols in fetal medicine. Most centers (61%) considered the provision of information to families as their most important goal.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to describe multidisciplinary fetal centers in the United States. It demonstrates variability between centers. More research is needed in order to evaluate the impact of this variability.

Provider dismissal of vaccine-hesitant families: misguided policy that fails to benefit children

Some health care providers have adopted the policy of refusing to accept into their practices families who refuse to vaccinate their children according to the standard vaccine schedule. While the frustration that drives these policies is understandable, the practice of refusing to see these families is misguided. Such a strategy does not benefit the child or the health of the community, and may have a negative impact on both. Physicians represent the best opportunity to influence the vaccine-hesitant parent, but only if physicians are willing to care for these families will that be possible. Maintaining a relationship of open communication and trust remains the best strategy for addressing the problem of parental vaccine hesitancy.

Finding the proper balance between freedom and justice: why we should not eliminate personal belief exemptions to vaccine mandates

Lantos and colleagues (this issue) propose to eliminate personal belief exemptions from school vaccine mandates, particularly for those vaccines that target deadly contagious childhood disease. They argue that not doing so would be unjust. In this counterpoint, we argue that, for reasons grounded in both health policy and morality, a just vaccine policy need not prohibit parents from claiming personal belief exemptions.

Adolescent refusal of lifesaving treatment: are we asking the right questions?

In life-threatening situations, whether and under what conditions a minor should be allowed to refuse a lifesaving intervention is an important question. This article addresses the issue of whether adolescents, as a rule, possess capacity of sufficient quality that it should be respected even in the case of life-altering medical decisions. After reviewing the traditional approach to determining when adolescents should have their decisions respected, an approach that focuses on establishing capacity under a traditional informed consent model, the article reviews our evolving understanding of adolescent brain development and explores the implications for adolescent decision-making capacity. The author argues that a demonstration of understanding and mature reasoning abilities is not sufficient to establish decision-making capacity and that most minors do not possess fully mature decision-making capacity. Finally, the author suggests an approach to adolescent decision-making that is more reflective of the developing state of the adolescent brain.

Revisiting the best interest standard: uses and misuses

The best interest standard is the threshold most frequently employed by physicians and ethics consultants in challenging a parent's refusal to provide consent for a child's medical care. In this article, I will argue that the best interest standard has evolved to serve two different functions, and that these functions differ sufficiently that they require separate standards. While the best interest standard is appropriate for choosing among alternative treatment options for children, making recommendations to parents, and making decisions on behalf of a child when the legal decision makers are either unable to make a decision or are in dispute, a different standard is required for deciding when to seek state interference with parental decision-making authority. I will suggest that the harm principle provides a more appropriate threshold for determining when to seek state intervention than the best interest standard.

Ashley revisited: a response to the critics

The case of Ashley X involved a young girl with profound and permanent developmental disability who underwent growth attenuation using high-dose estrogen, a hysterectomy, and surgical removal of her breast buds. Many individuals and groups have been critical of the decisions made by Ashley's parents, physicians, and the hospital ethics committee that supported the decision. While some of the opposition has been grounded in distorted facts and misunderstandings, others have raised important concerns. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief review of the case and the issues it raised, then address 25 distinct substantive arguments that have been proposed as reasons that Ashley's treatment might be unethical. We conclude that while some important concerns have been raised, the weight of these concerns is not sufficient to consider the interventions used in Ashley's case to be contrary to her best interests, nor are they sufficient to preclude similar use of these interventions in the future for carefully selected patients who might also benefit from them.

Ethical issues in research involving infants

The future health of infants and children is dependent on the performance of clinical research in which infants participate. Achieving a proper balance between this social good and the obligation to protect infants who participate in research is a significant challenge. As investigators design and implement research protocols, they should be aware of the ethical and legal requirements that govern research with infants. For research to satisfy ethical and legal requirements it must be scientifically sound and significant, subject selection must be fair, approaching families for enrollment must avoid pressure, the risks to participants cannot be excessive and must be minimized, risks must be justified by the benefits of the research, valid and voluntary informed consent must be obtained, enrolled subjects must be respected, and the protocol must have obtained approval of an independent ethical review board.

Characterisation of organisational issues in paediatric clinical ethics consultation: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The traditional approach to resolving ethics concerns may not address underlying organisational issues involved in the evolution of these concerns. This represents a missed opportunity to improve quality of care "upstream". The purpose of this study was to understand better which organisational issues may contribute to ethics concerns.

METHODS

Directed content analysis was used to review ethics consultation notes from an academic children's hospital from 1996 to 2006 (N = 71). The analysis utilised 18 categories of organisational issues derived and modified from published quality improvement protocols.

RESULTS

Organisational issues were identified in 68 of the 71 (96%) ethics consult notes across a range of patient settings and reasons for consultation. Thirteen of the 18 categories of organisational issues were identified and there was a median of two organisational issues per consult note. The most frequently identified organisational issues were informal organisational culture (eg, collective practices and approaches to situations with ethical dimensions that are not guided by policy), policies and procedures (eg, staff knows policy and/or procedural guidelines for an ethical concern but do not follow it) and communication (eg, communication about critical information, orders, or hand-offs repeatedly does not occur among services).

CONCLUSIONS

Organisational issues contribute to ethical concerns that result in clinical ethics consults. Identifying and addressing organisational issues such as informal culture and communication may help decrease the recurrence of future similar ethics concerns.

Clinical report--Forgoing medically provided nutrition and hydration in children

There is broad consensus that withholding or withdrawing medical interventions is morally permissible when requested by competent patients or, in the case of patients without decision-making capacity, when the interventions no longer confer a benefit to the patient or when the burdens associated with the interventions outweigh the benefits received. The withdrawal or withholding of measures such as attempted resuscitation, ventilators, and critical care medications is common in the terminal care of adults and children. In the case of adults, a consensus has emerged in law and ethics that the medical administration of fluid and nutrition is not fundamentally different from other medical interventions such as use of ventilators; therefore, it can be forgone or withdrawn when a competent adult or legally authorized surrogate requests withdrawal or when the intervention no longer provides a net benefit to the patient. In pediatrics, forgoing or withdrawing medically administered fluids and nutrition has been more controversial because of the inability of children to make autonomous decisions and the emotional power of feeding as a basic element of the care of children. This statement reviews the medical, ethical, and legal issues relevant to the withholding or withdrawing of medically provided fluids and nutrition in children. The American Academy of Pediatrics concludes that the withdrawal of medically administered fluids and nutrition for pediatric patients is ethically acceptable in limited circumstances. Ethics consultation is strongly recommended when particularly difficult or controversial decisions are being considered.

Boldt v. Boldt: A pediatric ethics perspective

On balance, the potential harms and benefits of circumcision in an older child or adolescent are sufficiently closely aligned that parents should be permitted to make decisions about circumcision on behalf of their children. To make a case for prohibition, medical harms would have to be of such likelihood and magnitude that no reasonable potential benefit (social, religious, cultural, or medical) could justify doing it to a child. However, I would suggest that the following additional principles should apply: (1) Informed permission from parents is essential. Only about half of the parents considering neonatal circumcision are given any substantive information about the procedure. That practice is not acceptable for a procedure that is not medically essential and carries some risk of harm. A fully informed consent is essential, and must include a balanced discussion of potential harms and benefits of the procedure to the child. Parents should be given accurate and impartial information and allowed to make an informed decision regarding what is in the best interest of the child. (2) Consent of both parents should be required when the procedure is not medically required. It should not be performed in the face of parental disagreement. (3) Absent a significant medical indication, circumcision should not be performed on older children and adolescents in the face of dissent or less than enthusiastic assent. (4) Circumcision should be performed competently and safely by adequately trained providers.29 This should include infection-control measures, a sterile environment for the procedure, and no mouth-penis contact. (5) Analgesia is safe and effective. Adequate analgesia and post-operative pain control must be provided. In the case of Jimmy Boldt, I would suggest that without some compelling medical reason for performing a circumcision, the procedure should not be performed in the absence of agreement between his parents. The fact that Jimmy's father had sole custody does not eliminate the mother's ethical right and obligation to look after the welfare of her son. While the mother may not have legal decision-making authority, that legal determination does not appear to be related either to a lack of interest in her son's welfare or an inability to carry out that role. Jimmy is her son, and she has an interest in seeing his welfare protected. Whether or not she has legal rights, I would be very reluctant to perform an elective procedure for cultural or religious reasons without the permission of both parents and the unambiguous assent of Jimmy himself. Neither appears to be present in the case as it presented to the courts.

A critique of criteria for evaluating vaccines for inclusion in mandatory school immunization programs

Several new vaccines for children and young adults have been introduced recently and now appear on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' recommended childhood and adolescent immunization schedule (meningococcal, rotavirus, human papillomavirus). As new vaccines are introduced, states face complex decisions regarding which vaccines to fund and which vaccines to require for school or child care entry. This complexity is evidenced by the current debate surrounding the human papillomavirus vaccine. We present a critique to the approach and criteria for evaluating vaccines for inclusion in mandatory school immunization programs that have been adopted by the Washington State Board of Health by illustrating how these criteria might be applied to the human papillomavirus vaccine. We conclude that these 9 criteria can help ensure a deliberate and informed approach to important public policy decisions, but we argue that several clarifications of the review process are needed along with the addition of a 10th criterion that ensures that a new vaccine mandate relates in some manner to increasing safety in the school environment.

Attenuating Growth in Children With Profound Developmental Disability

Caring for children with profound developmental disabilities can be difficult and demanding. For nonambulatory children with severe, combined neurologic and cognitive impairment, all the necessities of life must be provided by caregivers, usually parents, and these tasks become more difficult as the child grows to adolescence and adulthood. Many parents would like to continue caring for their child with special needs at home but find it difficult to do so as the child increases in size. If growth could be permanently arrested while the child was still small, both child and parent would likely benefit because this would facilitate the option of continued care in the home. Treatment of the child with high-dose estrogen, initiated at an early age, could provide this option. High-dose estrogen both inhibits growth and rapidly advances maturation of the epiphyseal growth plates, bringing about permanent attenuation in size after a relatively short period of treatment. We present a case report and discuss the medical and ethical considerations of such an intervention strategy. We suggest that after proper screening and informed consent, growth-attenuation therapy should be a therapeutic option available to these children should their parents request it.

Ethical issues arising from the participation of children in genetic research

With new tools derived from the Human Genome Project, genetic research is expanding from the study of rare, single gene disorders to the evaluation of genetic contributors to common, complex diseases. Many genetic studies include pediatric participants. The ethical concerns related to pediatric participation in genetic research derive from the study designs commonly employed in gene discovery and from the power accorded to genetic prediction in our society. In both family-based studies and large studies combining genetic and other health-related data, special attention should be placed on recruitment procedures, informed consent, and confidentiality protections. If data repositories are created for long-term use, we recommend re-consent of pediatric participants when they reach adulthood. In addition, the potential for disclosure of individual results should be considered as part of the institutional review of genetic studies, taking into account the validity of research data and the potential that such data could be used in health care. The potential for genetic results to pose harms of personal and group stigma is also a consideration. Because genetic information is often accorded special power in our society, careful attention should be paid to how genetic information is collected and used in research involving pediatric participants.

Conducting ethical research in pediatrics: a brief historical overview and review of pediatric regulations

Achieving proper balance between the social good that comes from performing research that involves children and offering the appropriate level of protection to children who participate in research is a significant challenge. As investigators design and implement research protocols, they should be aware of the ethical and legal requirements that govern research with human participants. This is especially true of research that involves children and other vulnerable groups. The welfare of children participating in research depends on knowledgeable, caring, and responsible investigators who place the well-being of the research participant above all other aspects of the research project. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief overview of the history of research involving children, to provide a basis for understanding the context within which the current federal regulations were written, and to provide an overview of the regulatory requirements that relate to research involving children. Good research is ethical research, and that requires investigators who take seriously the importance of participant welfare, meaningful informed consent, and respect for research participants.

Recreational injuries in Washington state national parks

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to identify the number and types of recreational injuries sustained by visitors to Mount Rainier National Park and Olympic National Park in Washington State and to compare the nature of injuries sustained by children compared with adults.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed case incident reports obtained by rangers in Mount Rainer National Park and Olympic National Park between 1997 and 2001. Data collected included victim age, gender, date of injury, activity preinjury, type of injury, and mechanism of injury.

RESULTS

There were 535 cases of recreational wilderness injuries (including 19 total deaths), yielding a rate of 22.4 injuries per million visits. The mean age of injury victims was 34 years. Males were more likely to sustain injury than were females (59% vs 41%). Most injuries occurred during summer months between noon and 6:00 PM, and 90% occurred during daylight hours. The most common preinjury activities included hiking (55%), winter sports (15%), and mountaineering (12%), and the most common types of injuries included sprains, strains and soft tissue injuries (28%), fractures or dislocations (26%), and lacerations (15%). A total of 121 (23%) of the injuries occurred in children (<18 years of age). There were 19 deaths in the 2 national parks (18 men, 1 woman); all victims were adults. Hiking (58%) and mountaineering (26%) were the most common activities at the time of death. Mechanism of death included falls (37%), medical (eg, myocardial infarction) (21%), drowning (5%), and suicide (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The most common type of injury was soft tissue injury, and injuries occurred most commonly while hiking, during daylight hours, and in the summer. Preinjury activities and types of injuries were different in children compared with adults. Knowledge of how and when injuries occur in national parks can assist in determining what resources are needed to help provide a safer environment for park visitors. This study may also aid prevention strategies in the national parks, guide training of rangers, aid in the preparation of first aid kits, and further the education of people who participate in wilderness activities.

Responding to parental refusals of immunization of children

The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly endorses universal immunization. However, for childhood immunization programs to be successful, parents must comply with immunization recommendations. The problem of parental refusal of immunization for children is an important one for pediatricians. The goal of this report is to assist pediatricians in understanding the reasons parents may have for refusing to immunize their children, review the limited circumstances under which parental refusals should be referred to child protective services agencies or public health authorities, and provide practical guidance to assist the pediatrician faced with a parent who is reluctant to allow immunization of his or her child.

Finding effective strategies for teaching ethics: a comparison trial of two interventions

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of two teaching methods (written case analyses and written case analyses with group discussion) on students' recognition and assessment of common ethical dilemmas.

METHOD

In 1999-2000, all third-year students at the University of Washington School of Medicine on a pediatrics clinical rotation participated in the study. Eighty students were based in Seattle and 66 were in community sites in a five-state area. All students received three scenarios with written instructions for ethical analysis, submitted written answers, and received written feedback from a single evaluator. The Seattle students also participated in an hour-long, one-time discussion group about the cases. All students submitted a final case analysis. Four components of the case analyses were evaluated: ability to identify ethical issues, see multiple viewpoints, formulate an action plan, and justify their actions. One investigator evaluated a masked subset of the case analyses from both groups to assess whether teaching method affected the students' ability to recognize and assess ethical problems.

RESULTS

Forty-eight of 146 available case analysis sets (each set included three initial analyses plus one final analysis) were masked and coded. Performances on the initial analyses were similar in both groups (p >.2-.8). The discussion group had a higher absolute increase in total score (p =.017) and in ability to formulate a plan (p =.013) on the final case analysis. Performances otherwise remained largely similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Students' recognition and assessment of ethical issues in pediatrics improves following a case-based exercise with structured feedback. Group discussion may optimize the learning experience and increase students' satisfaction.

Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention

Minors are generally considered incompetent to provide legally binding decisions regarding their health care, and parents or guardians are empowered to make those decisions on their behalf. Parental authority is not absolute, however, and when a parent acts contrary to the best interests of a child, the state may intervene. The best interests standard is the threshold most frequently employed in challenging a parent's refusal to provide consent for a child's medical care. In this paper, I will argue that the best interest standard provides insufficient guidance for decision-making regarding children and does not reflect the actual standard used by medical providers and courts. Rather, I will suggest that the Harm Principle provides a more appropriate threshold for state intervention than the Best Interest standard. Finally, I will suggest a series of criteria that can be used in deciding whether the state should intervene in a parent's decision to refuse medical care on behalf of a child.

Involuntary sterilization of persons with mental retardation: an ethical analysis

Legitimate concerns on the part of parents and guardians may lead to requests for sterilization of a mentally retarded person in their care. At the same time, mentally retarded persons must be protected from actions that do not serve their best interests. This paper will review the history of involuntary sterilization in the United States and evaluate the ethical arguments that are relevant to decisions about involuntary sterilization. While other, less permanent forms of contraception might be acceptable, involuntary sterilization ought not be performed on mentally retarded persons who retain the capacity for reproductive decision-making, the ability to raise a child, or the capacity to provide valid consent to marriage. Mentally retarded persons who lack capacity in those three areas should be considered for involuntary sterilization only when the procedure is necessary, sterilization would serve the best interests of the mentally retarded person, less intrusive and temporary methods of contraception or control of menstruation are not acceptable alternatives, and procedural safeguards have been implemented to assure a fair decision-making process.

A randomized, clinical trial of oral midazolam plus placebo versus oral midazolam plus oral transmucosal fentanyl for sedation during laceration repair

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a combination of oral transmucosal fentanyl (Fentanyl Oralet, Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, IL) plus oral midazolam has an acceptable safety profile and is more effective than oral midazolam alone for sedation during laceration repair in a pediatric emergency department (ED).

METHODS

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Patients between 2 and 8 years of age who weighed >10 kg and presented to the ED with a laceration in need of repair under sedation were eligible for inclusion. All patients received oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg; maximum dose 10 mg) and either fentanyl (5-10 microg/kg) or placebo in oralet form. Data collected every 5 minutes included the following: heart rate, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, pain as measured on a Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score (CHEOPS) scale (range: 4-13), and an activity scale (range: 1-5). Effectiveness of sedation was measured by CHEOPS and activity scores compared between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were randomized to receive oral midazolam plus fentanyl (N = 28) or oral midazolam plus placebo (N = 23). Age, weight, gender, or baseline pain and activity scores did not differ between the 2 groups. Seven patients in the fentanyl group vomited compared with 0 patients in the placebo group. Three patients in the fentanyl group and no patients in the placebo group had brief oxygen saturation below 93% on room air. The mean pain score within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure did not differ between the 2 groups (fentanyl group, 9.4 versus placebo group, 8.8). Mean activity scores within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure were also similar (fentanyl group, 4.3 versus placebo group, 4.3).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of oral transmucosal fentanyl to oral midazolam did not improve pain or activity scores in pediatric patients given sedation for laceration repair. Patients who received Fentanyl Oralet suffered significantly more side effects despite the relatively low doses administered in this study. Oral transmucosal fentanyl should not be used for procedural sedation in the ED.

Attitudes toward limitation of support in a pediatric intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively determine opinions of members of a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) team regarding the appropriateness of aggressive care. The types of support that caregivers sought to limit and their reasons for wanting these limits were collected over time.

DESIGN

Prospective survey of caregiver opinions.

SETTING

PICU in an academic tertiary care children's hospital.

SUBJECTS

A total of 68 intensive care nurses, 11 physicians attending in the PICU, 10 critical care and anesthesia fellows, and 24 anesthesia and pediatric residents.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

During a 6-month period, 503 patients were admitted to the PICU. Within this time period, 52.4% of all deaths were preceded by limitation of support, with 100% of noncardiac surgical deaths preceded by limitation of medical interventions. At least one caregiver wished to limit care for 63 of these patients (12.5%). When caregivers wished to limit support they most frequently wished to limit invasive modes of support such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (94%) and hemodialysis (83%). The ethical rationales identified most often for wishing to limit support were burden vs. benefit (88%) and qualitative futility (83%). Preadmission quality of life was cited less frequently (50%). Caregivers were less likely to limit care on the basis of quality of life. Nurses and physicians in the PICU were very similar to each other in the types of support they thought should be limited and their ethical rationales.

CONCLUSIONS

When making decisions about whether or not to limit care for a patient, caregivers were more likely to rely on the perceived benefit to the patient than preadmission quality of life.

Discordant radiograph interpretation between emergency physicians and radiologists in a pediatric emergency department

OBJECTIVES

To describe the types of discrepancies in radiograph interpretation between emergency physicians and radiologists in a pediatric emergency department, and to determine the impact of discrepant interpretations on patient care.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of discordant radiographs from the period beginning March 1, 1995 and ending March 31, 1996. During this period, 2083 radiographs were coded by the radiologist as concordant or discordant. Three hundred forty-nine were coded as discordant, and 324 were eligible for the study. Charts were reviewed for relevant physical examination findings and emergency department management. Discrepancies that affected patient care were deemed clinically significant.

RESULTS

Twenty-three (1.1%) of 2083 radiographs were interpreted differently by the emergency physician and the radiologist in a way that might have changed patient management. This represents 7% (23/324) of the radiographs originally coded by a radiologist as discrepant. The most common discrepancy was a patient with a normal chest examination and a radiograph interpreted as having an infiltrate by the emergency physician, but subsequently read as having no infiltrate by a radiologist (12/324). These patients may have received antibiotics unnecessarily. Two discrepant interpretations had the potential to have serious consequences to the patient if not identified. One patient with cardiomegaly and another patient with free air on abdominal radiograph were not noted by the emergency physician.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency physicians would benefit from more rigorous interpretation of chest x-rays to avoid unnecessary treatment with antibiotics. Emergency physicians do a good job interpreting plain radiographs, but occasionally miss significant findings that could lead to adverse outcomes. The presence of radiologists to immediately read radiographs 24 hours a day could prevent missed findings, but, given the small number of significant misinterpretations, is unlikely to be cost effective.

Pediatric wilderness recreational deaths in western Washington State

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the causes and characteristics of pediatric recreational wilderness deaths.

METHODS

All deaths of children between 12 months and 20 years of age involving a wilderness recreational activity in 5 western Washington counties between 1987 and 1996 were identified by medical examiners' logs. Univariate analysis was used to examine variables such as age, gender, activity, mechanism of injury, adult presence, blood alcohol level, safety equipment, and mode of evacuation.

RESULTS

Of 40 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 90% involved male subjects and 83% of victims were 13 to 19 years old. Hiking (33%), swimming (20%), and river rafting (10%) were the most common activities. Death was most often by drowning (55%) or closed head injury (26%). No victim was alone. All children younger than 10 years of age were accompanied by an adult, in contrast to only 26% of individuals 10 years or older. Only 4 victims had drugs or alcohol in their system. No victim wore a personal flotation device or helmet, and only 5% had foul weather gear. Although nearly one third of victims were transported by airlift, more than half of the victims were dead at the scene.

CONCLUSION

Males and teenagers were the 2 major risk groups for recreational wilderness deaths. Traditional activities such as hiking and swimming were the most common causes of death. Children younger than 10 years died despite the presence of an adult, whereas teenagers were usually with groups of peers. The majority of victims were not prepared for adverse events with basic safety equipment.