1
|
Rubin MA, Lewis A, Creutzfeldt CJ, Shrestha GS, Boyle Q, Illes J, Jox RJ, Trevick S, Young MJ. Equity in Clinical Care and Research Involving Persons with Disorders of Consciousness. Neurocrit Care 2024:10.1007/s12028-024-02012-3. [PMID: 38872033 DOI: 10.1007/s12028-024-02012-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2024] [Accepted: 05/09/2024] [Indexed: 06/15/2024]
Abstract
People with disorders of consciousness (DoC) are characteristically unable to synchronously participate in decision-making about clinical care or research. The inability to self-advocate exacerbates preexisting socioeconomic and geographic disparities, which include the wide variability observed across individuals, hospitals, and countries in access to acute care, expertise, and sophisticated diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic interventions. Concerns about equity for people with DoC are particularly notable when they lack a surrogate decision-maker (legally referred to as "unrepresented" or "unbefriended"). Decisions about both short-term and long-term life-sustaining treatment typically rely on neuroprognostication and individual patient preferences that carry additional ethical considerations for people with DoC, as even individuals with well thought out advance directives cannot anticipate every possible situation to guide such decisions. Further challenges exist with the inclusion of people with DoC in research because consent must be completed (in most circumstances) through a surrogate, which excludes those who are unrepresented and may discourage investigators from exploring questions related to this population. In this article, the Curing Coma Campaign Ethics Working Group reviews equity considerations in clinical care and research involving persons with DoC in the following domains: (1) access to acute care and expertise, (2) access to diagnostics and therapeutics, (3) neuroprognostication, (4) medical decision-making for unrepresented people, (5) end-of-life decision-making, (6) access to postacute rehabilitative care, (7) access to research, (8) inclusion of unrepresented people in research, and (9) remuneration and reciprocity for research participation. The goal of this discussion is to advance equitable, harmonized, guideline-directed, and goal-concordant care for people with DoC of all backgrounds worldwide, prioritizing the ethical standards of respect for autonomy, beneficence, and justice. Although the focus of this evaluation is on people with DoC, much of the discussion can be extrapolated to other critically ill persons worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael A Rubin
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, TX, USA
| | | | - Claire J Creutzfeldt
- Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Cambia Palliative Care Center of Excellence, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Gentle S Shrestha
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu, Nepal
| | - Quinn Boyle
- Neuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Judy Illes
- Neuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ralf J Jox
- Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | - Michael J Young
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
- Division of Neurocritical Care, Department of Neurology, Center for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Poppe C, Elger BS. Brain-Computer Interfaces, Completely Locked-In State in Neurodegenerative Diseases, and End-of-Life Decisions. JOURNAL OF BIOETHICAL INQUIRY 2024; 21:19-27. [PMID: 37466825 PMCID: PMC11052847 DOI: 10.1007/s11673-023-10256-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023]
Abstract
In the future, policies surrounding end-of-life decisions will be faced with the question of whether competent people in a completely locked-in state should be enabled to make end-of-life decisions via brain-computer interfaces (BCI). This article raises ethical issues with acting through BCIs in the context of these decisions, specifically self-administration requirements within assisted suicide policies. We argue that enabling patients to end their life even once they have entered completely locked-in state might, paradoxically, prolong and uphold their quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Poppe
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistr. 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
| | - Bernice S Elger
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistr. 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
- Center for Legal Medicine of Geneva and Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lazaridis C. Informed Consent and Decision-Making for Patients with Acquired Cognitive Impairment. Neurol Clin 2023; 41:433-442. [PMID: 37407097 DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/07/2023]
Abstract
Informed consent (IC) is an ethical and legal requirement grounded in the principle of autonomy. Cognitive impairment may often interfere with decision-making capacity necessitating alternative models of ethically sound deliberation. In cases where the patient lacks decision-making capacity, one must determine the appropriate decision-maker and the criteria used in making a medical decision appropriate for the patient. In this article, I critically discuss the traditional approaches of IC, advance directives, substituted judgment, and best interests. A further suggestion is that thinking about sufficient reasons for or against a course of action is a conceptual enrichment in addition to the concepts of interests and well-being. Finally, I propose another model of collective consensus-seeking decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christos Lazaridis
- Department of Neurology, University of Chicago, IL, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, University of Chicago, IL, USA; MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, IL.
| |
Collapse
|