Moral Distress: What Are We Measuring?

COVID-19 guidelines and media influenced ethical care in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

The early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic affected nursing homes and their residents heavily. Guidelines on how to mitigate the virus's spread and ensuring safe healthcare delivery were continually evolving. Concurrently, nursing homes faced intense media scrutiny. This challenging environment severely impacted registered nurses and physicians employed within these facilities.

AIM

To understand the ethical challenges experienced by registered nurses and physicians working in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive research using thematic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT

Individual online interviews with four registered nurses and eight physicians clinically active at nursing homes in Sweden.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. All participants provided written consent.

RESULTS

Registered nurses and physicians working in nursing homes perceived ethical challenges stemming from early COVID-19 pandemic guidelines and media coverage. The main theme generated was 'Struggling to maintain professional and ethical standards under pressure' incorporating two subthemes: 'Guidelines developed without the profession put pressure on staff' and 'Media's biased reporting was perceived as unethical and undermined care'. Guidelines from the authorities were considered as developed without professional involvement. It made them difficult to adhere to without deviating from professional and ethical compasses. Media coverage adversely influenced relatives' perceptions, resulting in mistrust towards physicians' and registered nurses' in delivering optimal care for the residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Resilient care in nursing homes necessitates the collaborative development of guidelines involving registered nurses and physicians, particularly amidst crises. Moreover, it is vital to provide support to registered nurses navigating ethical dilemmas, especially during pandemics. Guidelines and principles for care during a crisis should be development with professional involvement, be transparent, and be available to the public, to promote neutral media coverage. Future research is crucial to enhance ethical standards and tackle challenges in this context.

Moral distress among physicians in Norway: a longitudinal study

OBJECTIVES

To explore and compare physicians' reported moral distress in 2004 and 2021 and identify factors that could be related to these responses.

DESIGN

Longitudinal survey.

SETTING

Data were gathered from the Norwegian Physician Panel Study, a representative sample of Norwegian physicians, conducted in 2004 and 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

1499 physicians in 2004 and 2316 physicians in 2021.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The same survey instrument was used to measure change in moral distress from 2004 to 2021. Logistic regression analyses examined the role of gender, age and place of work.

RESULTS

Response rates were 67% (1004/1499) in 2004 and 71% (1639/2316) in 2021. That patient care is deprived due to time constraints is the most severe dimension of moral distress among physicians, and it has increased as 68.3% reported this 'somewhat' or 'very morally distressing' in 2004 compared with 75.1% in 2021. Moral distress also increased concerning that patients who 'cry the loudest' get better and faster treatment than others. Moral distress was reduced on statements about long waiting times, treatment not provided due to economic limitations, deprioritisation of older patients and acting against one's conscience. Women reported higher moral distress than men at both time points, and there were significant gender differences for six statements in 2021 and one in 2004. Age and workplace influenced reported moral distress, though not consistently for all statements.

CONCLUSION

In 2004 and 2021 physicians' moral distress related to scarcity of time or unfair distribution of resources was high. Moral distress associated with resource scarcity and acting against one's conscience decreased, which might indicate improvements in the healthcare system. On the other hand, it might suggest that physicians have reduced their ideals or expectations or are morally fatigued.

Overestimating prevalence? Rethinking boundaries and confounders of moral distress

Moral distress denotes a negative reaction to a morally challenging situation. It has been associated with adverse outcomes for healthcare professionals, patients and healthcare institutions. We argue that existing definitions, along with measures of moral distress, compromise the validity of empirical research. First, the definition and measurement of moral distress conflate moral events and psychological distress, even though they are distinct phenomena that should be assessed independently. Second, in many studies, there is a lack of clarity in distinguishing between moral and non-moral events. Finally, prior research on moral distress often overlooks the substantial body of evidence demonstrating the impact of diverse work-related factors, beyond moral events, on both distress and job retention. These challenges might undermine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at alleviating moral distress. We outline a comprehensive research agenda that encompasses conceptual clarifications, the refinement of data collection instruments, the design of studies and the application of appropriate statistical methods.

Measuring moral distress and moral injury: A systematic review and content analysis of existing scales

BACKGROUND

Moral distress (MD) and moral injury (MI) are related constructs describing the negative consequences of morally challenging stressors. Despite growing support for the clinical relevance of these constructs, ongoing challenges regarding measurement quality risk limiting research and clinical advances. This study summarizes the nature, quality, and utility of existing MD and MI scales, and provides recommendations for future use.

METHOD

We identified psychometric studies describing the development or validation of MD or MI scales and extracted information on methodological and psychometric qualities. Content analyses identified specific outcomes measured by each scale.

RESULTS

We reviewed 77 studies representing 42 unique scales. The quality of psychometric approaches varied greatly across studies, and most failed to examine convergent and divergent validity. Content analyses indicated most scales measure exposures to potential moral stressors and outcomes together, with relatively few measuring only exposures (n = 3) or outcomes (n = 7). Scales using the term MD typically assess general distress. Scales using the term MI typically assess several specific outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Results show how the terms MD and MI are applied in research. Several scales were identified as appropriate for research and clinical use. Recommendations for the application, development, and validation of MD and MI scales are provided.

Reliability and validity of the revised Rushton Moral Resilience Scale for healthcare workers

AIM

To refine the Rushton Moral Resilience Scale (RMRS) by creating a more concise scale, improving the reliability, particularly of the personal integrity subscale and providing further evidence of validity.

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are exposed to moral adversity in practice. When unable to preserve/restore their integrity, moral suffering ensues. Moral resilience is a resource that may mitigate negative consequences. To better understand mechanisms for doing so, a valid and reliable measurement tool is necessary.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

Participants (N = 1297) had completed ≥1 items on the RMRS as part of the baseline survey of a larger longitudinal study. Item analysis, confirmatory factor analyses, reliability analyses (Cronbach's alpha), and correlations were used to establish reliability and validity of the revised RMRS.

RESULTS

Item and confirmatory factor analysis were used to refine the RMRS from 21 to 16 items. The four-factor structure (responses to moral adversity, personal integrity, relational integrity and moral efficacy) demonstrated adequate fit in follow-up confirmatory analyses in the initial and hold-out sub-samples. All subscales and the total scale had adequate reliabilities (α ≥ 0.70). A higher-order factor analysis supports the computation of either subscale scores or a total scale score. Correlations of scores with stress, anxiety, depression and moral distress provide evidence of the scale's validity. Reliability of the personal integrity subscale improved.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The RMRS-16 demonstrates adequate reliability and validity, particularly the personal integrity subscale. Moral resilience is an important lever for reducing consequences when confronted with ethical challenges in practice. Improved reliability of the four subscales and having a shorter overall scale allow for targeted application and will facilitate further research and intervention development.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Data came from a larger study of Canadian healthcare workers from multiple healthcare organizations who completed a survey about their experiences during COVID-19.

Exposure to moral stressors and associated outcomes in healthcare workers: prevalence, correlates, and impact on job attrition

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) often experience morally challenging situations in their workplaces that may contribute to job turnover and compromised well-being. This study aimed to characterize the nature and frequency of moral stressors experienced by HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic, examine their influence on psychosocial-spiritual factors, and capture the impact of such factors and related moral stressors on HCWs' self-reported job attrition intentions.Methods: A sample of 1204 Canadian HCWs were included in the analysis through a web-based survey platform whereby work-related factors (e.g. years spent working as HCW, providing care to COVID-19 patients), moral distress (captured by MMD-HP), moral injury (captured by MIOS), mental health symptomatology, and job turnover due to moral distress were assessed.Results: Moral stressors with the highest reported frequency and distress ratings included patient care requirements that exceeded the capacity HCWs felt safe/comfortable managing, reported lack of resource availability, and belief that administration was not addressing issues that compromised patient care. Participants who considered leaving their jobs (44%; N = 517) demonstrated greater moral distress and injury scores. Logistic regression highlighted burnout (AOR = 1.59; p < .001), moral distress (AOR = 1.83; p < .001), and moral injury due to trust violation (AOR = 1.30; p = .022) as significant predictors of the intention to leave one's job.Conclusion: While it is impossible to fully eliminate moral stressors from healthcare, especially during exceptional and critical scenarios like a global pandemic, it is crucial to recognize the detrimental impacts on HCWs. This underscores the urgent need for additional research to identify protective factors that can mitigate the impact of these stressors.

Moral Distress in Radiation Oncology: Insights From Residents in Germany

Purpose

Being challenged by circumstances that force one to act in discordance with one's moral compass can lead to moral distress. The phenomenon has been widely investigated among nurses. This study was designed to shed some light on the situation of resident physicians in radiation oncology.

Methods and Materials

To gain insight into moral distress among residents in radiation oncology, a web-based questionnaire was developed and distributed throughout Germany. Participants were asked to evaluate possible burdensome situations and different options for relief. To outline the main issues of moral distress, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted. Relief options were examined by frequencies.

Results

The factor analysis yielded lack of time, contradiction between patient request and indication, nonmedical interests, and decisions between curative treatment and best supportive care as main issues for the 84 participants. Support from supervisors and senior physicians, as well as exchanges with resident colleagues were indicated as forms of relief. Professional support, such as ethics consultations, structured conversation groups (Balint), or psychological case supervisions, were rated as less helpful, although most participants reported a lack of experience with these.

Conclusions

The results are in accordance with existing assumptions that moral distress among physicians is mainly due to uncertainty. Regarding radiation oncology residents in particular, moral distress seems to be related to uncertainty in decisions and conflicts about treatment options. Although senior physicians and supervisors present important role models in dealing with moral distress, professional services such as ethics consultations offer an opportunity for relief that can still be expanded.

Re-examining the relationship between moral distress and moral agency in nursing

In recent years, the phenomenon of moral distress has been critically examined-and for a good reason. There have been a number of different definitions suggested, some that claimed to be consistent with the original definition but in fact referred to different epistemological states. In this paper, we re-examine moral distress by exploring its relationship with moral agency. We critically examine three conceptions of moral agency and argue that two of these conceptions risk placing nurses' values at the center of moral action when it ought to be the patient's values that shape nurses' obligations. We propose that the conception of moral agency advanced by Aimee Milliken which re-centers patient values, should be more broadly accepted within nursing. We utilize a case example to demonstrate a situation in which the values of a patient's parents (surrogates) justifiably constrained nurses' moral agency, creating moral distress. Through an examination of constraints on nurse agency in this case, we illustrate the problematic nature of 'narrow' moral distress and the value of re-considering moral distress.  Finally, we provide an action-oriented proposal identifying mediating steps that we argue have utility for nurses (and other healthcare professionals) to mediate between experiences of narrow moral distress and the exercise of moral agency.

Clinician Moral Distress: Toward an Ethics of Agent-Regret

Moral distress names a widely discussed and concerning clinician experience. Yet the precise nature of the distress and the appropriate practical response to it remain unclear. Clinicians speak of their moral distress in terms of guilt, regret, anger, or other distressing emotions, and they often invoke them interchangeably. But these emotions are distinct, and they are not all equally fitting in the same circumstances. This indicates a problematic ambiguity in the moral distress concept that obscures its distinctiveness, its relevant circumstances, and how individual clinicians and the medical community should practically respond to it. We argue that, in a range of situations that are said to be morally distressing, the characteristic emotion can be well-understood in terms of what Bernard Williams calls "agent-regret." We show what can thereby be gained in terms of a less ambiguous concept and a more adequate ethical response to this distinctive and complex clinician experience.

Sub-categories of moral distress among nurses: A descriptive longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate regarding how moral distress should be defined. Some scholars argue that the standard "narrow" definition overlooks morally relevant causes of distress, while others argue that broadening the definition of moral distress risks making measurement impractical. However, without measurement, the true extent of moral distress remains unknown.

RESEARCH AIMS

To explore the frequency and intensity of five sub-categorizations of moral distress, resources used, intention to leave, and turnover of nurses using a new survey instrument.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A mixed methods embedded design included a longitudinal, descriptive investigator-developed electronic survey with open-ended questions sent twice a week for 6 weeks. Analysis included descriptive and comparative statistics and content analysis of narrative data.

PARTICIPANTS

Registered nurses from four hospitals within one large healthcare system in Midwest United States.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

IRB approval was obtained.

RESULTS

246 participants completed the baseline survey, 80 participants provided data longitudinally for a minimum of 3 data points. At baseline, moral-conflict distress occurred with the highest frequency, followed by moral-constraint distress and moral-tension distress. By intensity, the most distressing sub-category was moral-tension distress, followed by "other" distress and moral-constraint distress. Longitudinally, when ranked by frequency, nurses experienced moral-conflict distress, moral-constraint distress, and moral-tension distress; by intensity, scores were highest for moral-tension distress, moral-uncertainty distress, and moral-constraint distress. Of available resources, participants spoke with colleagues and senior colleagues more frequently than using consultative services such as ethics consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses experienced distress related to a number of moral issues extending beyond the traditional understanding of moral distress (as occurring due to a constraint) suggesting that our understanding and measurement of moral distress should be broadened. Nurses frequently used peer support as their primary resource but it was only moderately helpful. Effective peer support for moral distress could be impactful. Future research on moral distress sub-categories is needed.

Mental burden and moral distress among oncologists and oncology nurses in Germany during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

There is evidence for mental burden and moral distress among healthcare workers during the pandemic. However, there is scarcity of analyses regarding possible correlations of mental burden and moral distress in this context. This study provides data to quantify mental burden and possible associations with moral distress among physicians and nurses working in oncology in Germany.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with physicians and nurses working in oncology in Germany between March and July 2021. Next to sociodemographic characteristics and working conditions, mental burden and moral distress were assessed using standardized instruments. Binary multivariate logistic regression using the enter method was performed in order to explore the relationship between mental burden and moral distress.

RESULTS

121 physicians and 125 nurses were included in the study. Prevalence of clinically relevant depressive symptoms, anxiety, somatic symptoms, burnout symptoms and moral distress was 19.2, 14.5, 12.7, 46.0 and 34.7% in physicians and 41.4, 24.0, 46.8, 46.6 and 60.0% in nurses respectively. Mental burden was significantly associated with moral distress, being female/diverse, younger age < 40 and increase in workload. Nurses who felt sufficiently protected from COVID-19 reported significantly less moral distress.

CONCLUSION

To improve pandemic resilience, there is a need to ensure safe working environment including psychosocial support. Further evidence on risk and protective factors for moral distress is needed to be able to develop and implement strategies to protect healthcare workers within and beyond the pandemic.

Reducing Moral Distress by Teaching Healthcare Providers the Concepts of Values Pluralism and Values Imposition

AbstractThere is a clear need for interventions that reduce moral distress among healthcare providers (HCPs), given the high prevalence of moral distress and the far-ranging negative consequences it has for them. Healthcare ethics consultants are frequently called upon to manage moral distress, especially among nursing staff. Recently, researchers have both broadened the definition of moral distress and demarcated subcategories of the phenomenon with the intent of creating more targeted and effective interventions. One of the most frequently occurring subcategories of moral distress in this new taxonomy has been labeled "moral-constraint distress," though scholars have argued that not all constraints on HCPs' moral agency are inappropriate given the often-competing healthcare values of patients, families, and clinical staff. To attempt to reduce the instances of moral distress in cases in which the constraints on HCPs' moral agency are justified, we propose an intervention that focuses on shifting the HCPs' "frame of reference" on moral-constraint distress, teaching HCPs how to distinguish unjustified and justified constraints on their moral agency. The anchors of this blueprint for reducing moral-constraint distress are the philosophical concepts of "values pluralism" and "values imposition." The rationale for this intervention is that, in situations where the constraint on moral agency is justified but the experience of moral distress could nevertheless be severe, the emphasis needs to be on helping the HCP to "think differently" rather than "act differently."

Moral Distress and Burnout in NICU Nurses

The objectives of this study were to factor analyze the Moral Distress Scale-Revised (MDS-R) in NICU nurses and to evaluate the relationships among dimensions of the MDS-R and the demoralization, exhaustion, and loss of motive dimensions of the Burnout Measure (BM). A total of 142 NICU nurses completed modified pen-and-paper versions of the MDS-R and BM. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses showed that the MDS-R-14 was a relatively good fit for the data. The compromised care dimension predicted BM demoralization (β = 0.24) and exhaustion (β = 0.22), the futile care dimension predicted BM exhaustion (β = 0.18), and the untruthful care dimension predicted BM demoralization (β = .25). Strategies to mitigate moral distress and resulting burnout in NICU nurses should address futile care, compromised care, and untruthful care.