Telling their own stories: Encouraging veterinary students to ethically reflect

Ethical challenges experienced by veterinary practitioners in relation to adverse events: Insights from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Understanding ethical challenges experienced in relation to adverse events is necessary to inform strategies that optimise patient safety and practitioner wellbeing.

METHODS

A qualitative exploration of UK veterinary practitioners' experiences of adverse events was conducted. Data were collected via 12 focus groups and 20 interviews and analysed using an inductive coding technique.

RESULTS

Questions surrounding acceptable boundaries of care, decision-making autonomy, personal scope of practice, use of evidence and speaking up about patient safety concerns were identified as ethically challenging to practitioners when endeavouring to prevent adverse events. Issues of appropriate accountability, interaction and communication with animal owners and the prioritisation of emotional and technical support for themselves and others were identified as ethically challenging in the aftermath of adverse events.

LIMITATIONS

The qualitative nature of this study limits the generalisability of the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethical challenges are experienced by veterinary practitioners in relation to both preventing and responding in the aftermath of adverse events. Strategies that facilitate ethical decision making and reflection and encourage openness and learning from adverse events would likely improve patient safety and enhance practitioner wellbeing. Further research is needed to develop and implement support for practitioners who experience ethical challenges in relation to adverse events.

“There Was a Sense That Our Load Had Been Lightened”: Evaluating Outcomes of Virtual Ethics Rounds for Veterinary Team Members

Clinical ethics support services (CESS) are employed in healthcare to improve patient care and help team members develop skills to recognize and navigate ethically challenging situations (ECS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of ethics rounds, one form of CESS, on veterinary team members. An anonymous, online mixed-methods survey incorporating a 15-item instrument designed to assess the outcomes of moral case deliberation originally developed for human healthcare workers (the Euro-MCD 2.0), was developed. The survey was administered to veterinary team members prior to and following participation in a 90-min virtual ethics rounds session. A total of 23 sessions of virtual ethics rounds were held. In total, 213 individuals participated, and 89 completed both surveys (response rate 41.8%). Most respondents were female (n = 70, 81%). Most were veterinarians (n = 51, 59%), followed by other veterinary team members (practice manager, animal attendant) (n = 18, 21%), veterinary nurses or animal health technicians (n = 10, 12%) and veterinary students (n = 8, 9%). Age ranged from 20 to 73 (median 41, IQR 32–52, n = 87). While there was no statistically significant difference between overall modified Euro-MCD 2.0 scores between T1 and T2, there were statistically significant changes in 7 out of 15 Euro-MCD 2.0 items in the domains of moral competence and moral teamwork. Reflexive thematic analysis of free-text responses identified themes including the types, impact and barriers to resolving ECS, the impacts of ethics rounds on veterinary team members and constraints preventing veterinary team members from speaking up in the face of ECS. While participants largely described the impact of ethics rounds as beneficial (for example, by facilitating clarification of thinking about ECS, allowing participants to see ECS from the perspective of others and providing a safe space for discussion), reflecting on ECS could be stressful for participants. Active participation in ethics rounds may be inhibited in the context of power imbalance, or in settings where bullying occurs. Overall, carefully facilitated ethics rounds has the potential to improve the ability of veterinary team members to identify and navigate ECS, and potentially mitigate moral distress.

What Would You Do? Types of Ethical Challenging Situations Depicted in Vignettes Published in the Veterinary Literature from 1990 to 2020

Veterinary team members encounter a wide range of ethically challenging situations (ECS) in their work. Inability to resolve ECS in accordance with their values may negatively impact the wellbeing of veterinary team members. We sought to determine the types of ECS described in published ethical vignettes in the veterinary literature. We performed a strategic literature search, followed by a thematic analysis of vignettes published in the veterinary literature from 1990–2020. We identified 567 published vignettes in 544 publications. In the majority of vignettes, the protagonist was a veterinarian (61.6%) and the most common categories of animal involved were dogs (28.0%), livestock in general (10.8%), and cattle (10.6%). The primary type of ECS was coded for each scenario, generating 29 themes. These findings extend knowledge about types of ECS that may be encountered by veterinary team members. These themes can help to inform curricula and better prepare veterinary team members to navigate ECS. They may also highlight factors that contribute to ECS that can be addressed on a broad scale, such as through regulation, continuing professional development, or stakeholder education. Knowing that others may experience similar ECS may help veterinary team members feel part of a moral community.