The shared ethical framework to allocate scarce medical resources: a lesson from COVID-19

Justifying access to kidney care in low resource and humanitarian settings

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Access to and quality of kidney care is not equitable between or within countries. A natural question is whether global kidney care inequities are always unjustifiable and unfair, or are sometimes due to unavoidable competing or conflicting ethical duties or responsibilities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Health is a fundamental right for all people. People with kidney conditions should have the same claim on this human right as others. Countries have an obligation to progressively fulfil this right and a duty to do so equitably, but global progress has been slow. Countries with limited resources or faced with humanitarian emergencies must set priorities to allocate resources fairly. This process involves trade-offs and often people requiring kidney replacement therapy are left out because of costs, logistics and lack of data. Major burdens are placed on clinicians who grapple between their duty to their patient and professional codes and their responsibility to a 'greater good'. These dilemmas apply also to industry, governments and the international community who must recognize their share in these duties.

SUMMARY

Inequities in kidney health and care must be acknowledged and sustainable and collaborative solutions urgently found such that right to kidney care is progressively upheld for everyone everywhere.

Drug Shortage and Ethical Issues: Integrating Multidisciplinary Perspectives with a Shared Ethical Framework

Drug shortages can cause ethical dilemmas when no systematic, equitable allocation, or utilization schema is in place. During the COVID-19 pandemic, an ethical framework outlining moral values was proposed as way to approach allocating limited resources to patients. In addition to an ethical perspective, it is prudent to consider costs. Examining existing economic frameworks and combining them with an ethical perspective may provide a practical, systematic process for decision makers when allocating drugs in short supply. Drug shortages continue to impact multiple areas across different subspecialties of medicine due to multiple factors, including limited manufacturers, regulatory issues, and costs. All of these factors make it difficult to anticipate and manage drug shortages effectively, but developing a combined framework may reduce some of the ethical and equitable ambiguity with regards to patient care.

The relationship between socioeconomic status, medical accessibility, hope and psychological resilience of caregivers of children with chronic kidney disease in China: structural equation model

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the third most common cause of death after cancer and heart disease. The continuous treatment of children with CKD was greatly challenged during the COVID-19 pandemic, which significantly impacted the CKD children's prognosis and the caregivers' psychological status. However, the influence mechanism of socioeconomic status, medical delay duration, traffic pressure, and online consultation duration on caregivers' hope and psychological resilience still lacks relevant evidence.

METHODS

This study investigated the general social information, hope, and psychological resilience of 247 caregivers with CKD in 13 provinces of China in March 2020. Factor analysis and an exploratory Structural Equation Model ( SEM ) were used to find the best-fit model, and Bootstrapping was used to calculate the 95% CI of indirect effects.

RESULTS

The factor analysis obtained four common factors, namely, socioeconomic status (annual family income, education, and career stability), medical accessibility (online consultation duration, medical delay duration, and traffic pressure), hope (positive attitude, positive action, and intimate relationship) and psychological resilience (optimism, tenacity, and strength), with the cumulative contribution rate of 65.34%. Bootstrapping obtains the socioeconomic status β = 0.30 (95% CI [0.14, 0.47], P = 0.002), medical accessibility β = 0.31 (95% CI [0.12, 0.47], P = 0.002), and hope β = 0.40 (95% CI [0.27, 0.52], P = 0.002) has a direct impact on psychological resilience of CKD children caregivers, followed by medical accessibility β = 0.20 (95% CI [0.10, 0.38], P = 0.001) and hope β = 0.23 (95% CI [0.16, 0.32], P = 0.001) plays a mediating role between socioeconomic status and psychological resilience. The indirect impact effect β = 0.35 (95% CI [0.25, 0.50], P = 0.001) is greater than the direct impact effect β = 0.30 (95% CI [0.14, 0.47], P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Sufficient attention should still be given to children with immunodeficiency after the COVID-19 pandemic, such as CKD, to avoid infection of deadly. Secondly, the government should vigorously develop Primary medical institutions to ensure efficient treatment of severe patients in tertiary hospitals; Finally, the professional literacy of medical workers in remote diagnosis and treatment should be improved to enhance the country's emergency response capacity for similar major public events and the requirements for normalised epidemic prevention and control.

What does "urgency" mean when prioritizing cancer treatment? Results from a qualitative study with German oncologists and other experts during the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Cancer care in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic was affected by resource scarcity and the necessity to prioritize medical measures. This study explores ethical criteria for prioritization and their application in cancer practices from the perspective of German oncologists and other experts.

METHODS

We conducted fourteen semi-structured interviews with German oncologists between February and July 2021 and fed findings of interviews and additional data on prioritizing cancer care into four structured group discussions, in January and February 2022, with 22 experts from medicine, nursing, law, ethics, health services research and health insurance. Interviews and group discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Narratives of the participants focus on "urgency" as most acceptable criterion for prioritization in cancer care. Patients who are considered curable and those with a high level of suffering, were given a high degree of "urgency." However, further analysis indicates that the "urgency" criterion needs to be further distinguished according to at least three different dimensions: "urgency" to (1) prevent imminent harm to life, (2) prevent future harm to life and (3) alleviate suffering. In addition, "urgency" is modulated by the "success," which can be reached by means of an intervention, and the "likelihood" of reaching that success.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis indicates that while "urgency" is a well-established criterion, its operationalization in the context of oncology is challenging. We argue that combined conceptual and clinical analyses are necessary for a sound application of the "urgency" criterion to prioritization in cancer care.

Policy uptake and implementation of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in sub-Saharan African countries: status 2 years following the WHO recommendation

In October 2021, the WHO recommended the world's first malaria vaccine-RTS,S/AS01-to prevent malaria in children living in areas with moderate-to-high transmission in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). A second malaria vaccine, R21/Matrix-M, was recommended for use in October 2023 and added to the WHO list of prequalified vaccines in December 2023. This study analysis assessed the country status of implementation and delivery strategies for RTS,S/AS01 by searching websites for national malaria policies, guidelines and related documents. Direct contact with individuals working in malaria programmes was made to obtain documents not publicly available. 10 countries had documents with information relating to malaria vaccine implementation, 7 referencing RTS,S/AS01 and 3 (Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria) referencing RTS,S/AS01 and R21/Matrix-M. Five other countries reported plans for malaria vaccine roll-out without specifying which vaccine. Ghana, Kenya and Malawi, which piloted RTS,S/AS01, have now integrated the vaccine into routine immunisation services. Cameroon and Burkina Faso are the first countries outside the pilot countries to incorporate the vaccine into national immunisation services. Uganda plans a phased RTS,S/AS01 introduction, while Guinea plans to first pilot RTS,S/AS01 in five districts. The RTS,S/AS01 schedule varied by country, with the first dose administered at 5 or 6 months in all countries but the fourth dose at either 18, 22 or 24 months. SSA countries have shown widespread interest in rolling out the malaria vaccine, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization having approved financial support for 20 of 30 countries which applied as of March 2024. Limited availability of RTS,S/AS01 means that some approved countries will not receive the required doses. Vaccine availability and equity must be addressed even as R21/Matrix-M becomes available.