Green nudges for sustainable anaesthetic practice: institutional support to make individual change easier

Causes of moral distress among midwives: A scoping review

Numerous studies have evidenced moral distress among midwives; however, to date no research synthesis on causes of moral distress among midwives has been conducted. A scoping review was carried out to identify, comprehensively map, and categorize possible causes of moral distress among midwives, and to identify knowledge gaps. Six data bases were searched using Boolean logic. To be included, studies had to (a) present empirical findings on (b) causes of moral distress (c) among midwives (d) in English, German, French, or Italian. We included a final set of 43 studies. The vast majority of studies came from high-income countries (83.7%) and used a qualitative approach (69.8%); 48.8% of the studies were published in the past 5 years. Identified single reasons of moral distress were grouped into eight broader clusters, forming a coherent framework of reasons of moral distress: societal disregard, contemporary birth culture, resources, institutional characteristics, interprofessional relationships, interpersonal mistreatment of service users, defensive practice, and challenging care situations. These clusters mostly capture moral distress resulting from a conflict between external constraints and personal moral standards, with a smaller proportion also from an intraindividual conflict between multiple personal moral standards. Despite projected increases in demand for midwives, the midwifery workforce globally faces a crisis and is experiencing substantial strain. Moral distress further exacerbates the shortage of midwives, which negatively affects birth experiences and birth outcomes, ultimately rendering it a public health issue. Our findings offer points of leverage to better monitor and alleviate moral distress among midwives, contributing to reducing attrition rates and improving birth experiences and birth outcomes. Further research is essential to explore the issue of ecological moral distress, develop evidence-based interventions aimed at alleviating moral distress among midwives, and evaluate the effects of both individual and system-level interventions on midwives, intrapartum care, and service users' outcomes.

The Nitrous Oxide Project: assessment of advocacy and national directives to deliver mitigation of anaesthetic nitrous oxide

The environmental emissions attributed to anaesthetic nitrous oxide across the NHS are comparable to the carbon dioxide released by 135,000 flights from Frankfurt to New York. Much of these emissions are attributable to cumbersome and inadequately managed piped systems, resulting in excessive loss and waste. Since 2020, multiple hospital sites have been engaging with the Nitrous Oxide Project, a quality improvement method supporting a 'lean systems' approach to the provision of nitrous oxide. This review considers the frameworks supporting medical gas management in UK healthcare systems, and the impact of professional advocacy and medical gas stewardship to drive anaesthetic nitrous oxide mitigation in the NHS. Nitrous oxide mitigation efforts by grassroots and professional advocacy networks are enhanced through national centralised emission monitoring, distribution of data, technical information and provision of quality analysis. Given the climate harms of nitrous oxide, concerted efforts should be made to rationalise its use, and resources should be committed to supporting this at local, regional and national levels.

How should institutions help clinicians to practise greener anaesthesia: first-order and second-order responsibilities to practice sustainably

There is a need for all industries, including healthcare, to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. In anaesthetic practice, this not only requires a reduction in resource use and waste, but also a shift away from inhaled anaesthetic gases and towards alternatives with a lower carbon footprint. As inhalational anaesthesia produces greenhouse gas emissions at the point of use, achieving sustainable anaesthetic practice involves individual practitioner behaviour change. However, changing the practice of healthcare professionals raises potential ethical issues. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we discuss what moral duties anaesthetic practitioners have when it comes to practices that impact the environment. We argue that behaviour change among practitioners to align with certain moral responsibilities must be supplemented with an account of institutional duties to support this. In other words, we argue that institutions and those in power have second-order responsibilities to ensure that practitioners can fulfil their first-order responsibilities to practice more sustainably. The second goal of the paper is to consider not just the nature of second-order responsibilities but the content. We assess four different ways that second-order responsibilities might be fulfilled within healthcare systems: removing certain anaesthetic agents, seeking consensus, education and methods from behavioural economics. We argue that, while each of these are a necessary part of the picture, some interventions like nudges have considerable advantages.