Why Families Get Angry: Practical Strategies for Clinical Ethics Consultants to Rebuild Trust Between Angry Families and Clinicians in the Critical Care Environment

Clinical Ethics Consultation in Japan: What does it Mean to have a Functioning Ethics Consultation?

This research examines the current status of clinical ethics consultation (CEC) in Japan through a nationwide study conducted with chairs of ethics committees and clinical ethics committees among 1028 post-graduate clinical teaching hospitals. We also qualitatively analyzed their viewpoints of the CEC's benefits and problems related to hospital consultation services to identify the critical points for CEC and inform the development of a correctly functioning system. The questionnaire included structured questions about hospital CEC organization and service purpose and operation and open-ended questions about the benefits and problems of initiating CEC. The questionnaire comprised the presence/absence of an ethics committee, CEC services and membership when services were implemented, users, and the number of cases handled since inception. In addition, the respondents also provided their impressions of the CEC system's impact on their hospital by describing (a) the benefits of CEC services and (b) the ineffectual or harmful aspects of the CEC system. Qualitative data were examined using qualitative content analysis to determine the impact of establishing a CEC and the difficulties of practice. One hundred twenty-five questionnaires were returned from either the chair of the ethics committee or clinical ethics committee in teaching hospitals. Of these, 90 (72%) reported they provided CEC services. Additionally, 36 respondents (34.6%) reported that their existing research and clinical ethics committees had conducted CEC services, and 35 (33.7%) reported having a newly established clinical ethics committee conducting CEC services. Three positive effects of establishing and four challenges in managing CEC were also identified.

[In the final analysis, who is "problematic"? An integrative review of patients, physicians and problematic relationships]

The scope of this study was to assess the literature on the characteristics of patients, physicians, and physician-patient relationships considered 'problematic.' An integrative review of primary studies published between January 1, 2016, and September 30, 2021, in Portuguese, English and Spanish was conducted, Of the 3,414 papers identified in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Lilacs databases, 19 were selected for qualitative analysis. Seven studies were carried out in Europe, eight in North America, two in South America and two in China, totaling 1,694 patients, 1,903 assistant physicians, 101 residents and 160 medical academics. Physicians and academics considered the following to be problematic: patients with clinical conditions such as psychosomatic and chronic illnesses; symptoms and complaints such as pain; powerful emotions; problems in obtaining and sharing information, in decision-making, in the adherence to the therapeutic plan and in their self-care; and some sociodemographic and vulnerability characteristics. Among other aspects, patients, or their relatives, considered physicians to be problematic when they did not listen to them or appear to care about their children, Teaching medical communication and systemic interventions are recommended to improve physician-patient relationships.

Is there a role for ethics in addressing healthcare incivility?

In a healthcare setting, a multitude of ethical and moral challenges are often present when patients and families direct uncivil behavior toward clinicians and staff. These negative interactions may elicit strong social and emotional reactions among staff, other patients, and visitors; and they may impede the normal functioning of an institution. Ethics Committees and Clinical Ethics Consultation Services (CECSs) can meaningfully contribute to organizational efforts to effectively manage incivility through two distinct, yet inter-related channels. First, given their responsibility to promote a humane, respectful, and professional climate, many CECSs and Ethics Committees may assist institutional leadership in evaluating and monitoring incivility policies and procedures. Second, when confronted with individual incidents of patient/family incivility, Ethics Consultants can and often do work with all stakeholders to address and mitigate potentially deleterious impacts. This manuscript presents an overview of the multifaceted ethical implications of incivility in the healthcare environment, discusses the inherent qualifications of Ethics Consultants for assisting in the management of incivility, and proposes specific mitigating actions within the purview of CECSs and Ethics Committees. We also invite healthcare organizations to harness the skills and reputation of their CECSs and Ethics Committees in confronting incivility through comprehensive policies, procedures, and training.

Relational, Emotional, and Pragmatic Attributes of Ethics Consultations at a Children's Hospital

BACKGROUND

Pediatric ethics consultations are important but understudied, with little known about consultations' contextual attributes, which may influence how ethically problematic situations are perceived and addressed.

METHODS

We analyzed data regarding 245 pediatric clinical ethics consultations performed between 2013 and 2018 at a large children's hospital. Prespecified data elements included 17 core problematic issues that initiate consultations, 9 ethical considerations identified by the consultation service, and 7 relational, emotional, and pragmatic contextual attributes of the consultation. The main process measure was the cumulative consultation process, ranging from one-on-one discussions with the requestor, to meeting with the clinical team, separate meetings with the patient or family and the clinical team, or combined meeting with the patient or family and the clinical team.

RESULTS

The most-prevalent core problematic issues were intensity or limitation of treatment (38.8%) and treatment adherence and refusal (31%). Common pertinent ethical considerations were best interest (79.2%), benefits versus harms of treatment (51%), and autonomy and decision-making (46.5%). A total of 39.2% of consults culminated with a meeting with the clinical team, 9.4% with separate meetings, and 8.2% with a meeting with all parties. Common contextual attributes were discord (43.3%), acknowledged dilemma (33.5%), and articulate disagreement (29.8%). In exploratory analyses, specific contextual attributes were associated with the core problematic issue that initiated the consultation and with how the consultative process culminated.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric ethics consultations have contextual attributes that in exploratory analyses are associated with specific types of problems and, to a lesser degree, with the cumulative ethics consultation process.

The hard talk: Managing conflict in the cardiac intensive care unit

Conflict between parents and providers is common in the cardiac intensive care setting, particularly in patients with prolonged length of stay. Poor communication is the most commonly cited reason for conflict and is exacerbated when providers and families cannot find common ground and develop mutual trust. It is critically important that healthcare providers learn strategies to better partner with families in order to optimize patient medical and psychosocial outcomes. This requires providers to avoid falling prey to their own implicit (or unconscious) biases, including those towards families labeled as “difficult”. Building a healthy family-provider relationship is part of a healthcare provider's duty to treat, has a measurable effect on patient outcomes, and sets up a foundation for the provider-family dyad to more easily navigate any conflicts that do develop. Once a relationship is built, providers and families can talk through their conflicts. They are more likely to have open and transparent communication and are more able to give each other the benefit of the doubt when navigating difficult situations and/or behaviors, rather than labeling each other as intrinsically “difficult” people.

•

The healthcare team is designed to work together like chess pieces on a chess boardParents supporting critically ill hospitalized children may feel more like metaphorical checkers – isolated and out of place.

•

The everyday stresses of living in the cardiac intensive care unit frequently lead to parent-provider conflict.

•

Conflict occurs on a foundation of previous experiences of both parent and provider; these associated biases contribute to conflict escalation.

•

Avoiding labels and approaching difficult situations with empathy and self-reflection helps arrest the cycle of conflict and build mutual trust.