Physician autonomy and patient rights: lessons from an enforced blood transfusion and the role of patient blood management

Successful Case of Double Valve Replacement Surgery Using Autologous Blood Transfusion: A Patient's Autonomy Preserved with Excellent Clinical Outcome

BACKGROUND A blood cell saver, or autotransfusion system, is used to collect, wash, and return autologous blood collected from the surgical patient. This report describes a 55-year-old man who underwent combined mitral and aortic valve replacement surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass and had a successful outcome following intraoperative and postoperative autologous blood transfusion using a blood cell saver. CASE REPORT The patient did not accept blood transfusion for reasons of religious conscience and was in a critical condition, receiving palliative care. He needed combined mitral and aortic valve replacement surgery. The surgery was conducted using a cell saver (Sorin Xtra Autotransfusion System) in the intraoperative and postoperative periods for 24 h, to resolve this challenging case, from a technical and ethical point of view. The volume of red blood cells recovered intraoperatively was 1430 mL, with a hematocrit level of 40%, and 690 mL, with a hematocrit of 35%, in the postoperative period. Therefore, a significant volume of autologous blood was recovered. The autologous blood transfusion resulted in an excellent clinical outcome for the patient, who was discharged on the ninth postoperative day. CONCLUSIONS We can conclude that the use of a blood cell saver in cardiac surgery, in both intra- and postoperative periods, resulted in the maintenance of adequate hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, no infection postoperatively, and rapid and complete recovery of the patient. Thus, the use of the blood cell saver guaranteed the individual's autonomy to refuse blood products safely, with good clinical results, and without dependence on allogeneic blood transfusions.

Anesthesia Approach to Managing Severe Hemorrhagic Shock and Anemia With Non-transfusion Alternatives in a Practicing Jehovah's Witness: A Case Report

Traumatic hemorrhagic shock is a common yet life-threatening occurrence across the United States and is typically managed with blood transfusions as the standard of care. However, providers caring for a Jehovah's Witness patient who refuses transfusions due to religious reasons face unique ethical challenges in upholding evidence-based shock resuscitation protocols while respecting the patient's autonomy and faith-based stance that strictly prohibits blood products. We present a complex clinical case of a 46-year-old Jehovah's Witness who developed severe hemorrhagic shock, partial amputation, and critical anemia after a traumatic 40-mile-per-hour motorcycle collision resulting in comminuted fractures and arterial disruption. Despite receiving emergent blood transfusions initially, further transfusions were declined once his identity as a practicing Jehovah's Witness was disclosed. His hemoglobin plunged to dangerously low levels of 4.6 g/dL before stabilizing to 5.3 g/dL with pharmaceutical alternatives including intravenous iron, high-dose erythropoietin, and phlebotomy minimization. Respecting patient convictions while delivering effective evidence-based shock management created significant ethical conflicts given the proven efficacy of blood transfusions. However, this complex case demonstrates that through meticulous medical and surgical care coordinated by a multi-disciplinary team applying customized non-transfusion techniques, traumatic hemorrhagic shock and life-threatening anemia can still achieve favorable outcomes without relying on transfusions when respecting faith-based refusal of blood products.

Informed Consent in Mass Vaccination against COVID-19 in Romania: Implications of Bad Management

Informing patients and obtaining valid informed consent were significant challenges for the COVID-19 immunization program. In Romania, the authorities issued a strategy for activities regarding vaccination against COVID-19, including the informed consent procedure. The lack of legal preparedness was evident when the medical personnel at the vaccination centers were provided with informed consent forms that did not respect the existing legal requirements. In addition, the protocol for persons seeking vaccination stated that the patient was supposed to receive the informed consent form from the receptionist in order to read and sign it. We analyzed the legal implications and the malpractice litigation risk associated with this practice. Due to essential deficiencies and in the absence of an official enactment of new regulations, we conclude that the vaccination consent process did not comply with the legal requirements. Implications include medical personnel’s legal liability, loss of malpractice insurance coverage, and public mistrust that may have contributed to a low vaccination rate. Given the potential of future pandemics or other health crises, this may be a valuable lesson for developing better legal strategies.

The Limits of Acute Anemia

For many years, physicians’ approach to the transfusion of allogeneic red blood cells (RBC) was not individualized. It was accepted that a hemoglobin concentration (Hb) of less than 10 g/dL was a general transfusion threshold and the majority of patients were transfused immediately. In recent years, there has been increasing evidence that even significantly lower hemoglobin concentrations can be survived in the short term without sequelae. This somehow contradicts the observation that moderate or mild anemia is associated with relevant long-term morbidity and mortality. To resolve this apparent contradiction, it must be recognized that we have to avoid acute anemia or treat it by alternative methods. The aim of this article is to describe the physiological limits of acute anemia, match these considerations with clinical realities, and then present “patient blood management” (PBM) as the therapeutic concept that can prevent both anemia and unnecessary transfusion of RBC concentrates in a clinical context, especially in Intensive Care Units (ICU). This treatment concept may prove to be the key to high-quality patient care in the ICU setting in the future.

Patients' Choice, Consent, and Ethics in Patient Blood Management

The goal of patient blood management (PBM) is to optimize clinical outcomes for individual patients by managing their blood as a precious and unique resource to be safeguarded and managed judiciously. A corollary to successful PBM is the minimization or avoidance of blood transfusion and stewardship of donated blood. The first is achieved by a multidisciplinary approach with personalized management plans shared and decided on with the patient or their substitute. It follows that the physician-patient relationship is an integral component of medical practice and the fundamental link between patient and doctor based on trust and honest communication. Central to PBM is accurate and timely diagnosis based on sound physiology and pathophysiology as the bedrock on which scientifically based medicine is founded. PBM in all disease contexts starts with the questions, "What is the status of the patient's blood?" "If there are specific abnormalities in the blood, how should they be managed?" and "If allogeneic blood transfusion is considered, is there no reasonable alternative therapy?" There are compelling scientific reasons to implement a nontransfusion default position when there is clinical uncertainty and questionable evidence of clinical efficacy for allogeneic blood transfusion due to known potential hazards. Patients must be informed of their diagnosis, the nature, severity and prognosis of the disease, and treatment options along with risks and benefits. They should be involved in decision-making regarding their management. However, as part of this process, there are multifaceted medical, legal, ethical, and economic issues, encompassing shared decision-making, patient choice, and informed consent. Furthermore, variability in patient circumstances and preferences, the complexity of medical science, and the workings of health care systems in which consent takes place can be bewildering, not only for the patient but also for clinicians obtaining consent. Adding "patient" to the concept of blood management differentiates it from "donor" blood management to avoid confusion and the perception that PBM is a specific medical intervention. Personalized PBM is tailoring the PBM to the specific characteristics of each patient. With this approach, there should be no difficulty addressing the informed consent and ethical aspects of PBM. Patients can usually be reassured that there is nothing out of order with their blood, in which case the focus of PBM is to keep it that way. In some circumstances, a hematologist may be involved as a patient's blood advocate when abnormalities require expert involvement while the primary disease is being managed.

Medical Education: Patients’ Perspectives on Clinical Training and Informed Consent

There are complex ethical dilemmas inherent to medicine teaching, particularly in clinical practice involving actual patients. Questions must be raised on fulfilling medical students’ training needs while still respecting patients’ fundamental rights to autonomy and privacy. We aimed to assess patients’ perspectives regarding medical students’ involvement in their medical care. An observational, cross-sectional study was developed, and a questionnaire was applied randomly to patients waiting for a consultation/admitted to three distinct departments: General Surgery, Obstetrics/Gynaecology, and Infectious Diseases. Of the 77% interviewed patients who reported previous experiences with medical students, only 59% stated that they were asked for consent for their participation, and 28% stated that students had adequately introduced themselves. Patients from Gynaecology/Obstetrics were the ones who reported lower rates of these practices and were also the ones who were most bothered by students’ presence, stating that they would be more comfortable without the presence of medical students. Male patients received more explanations than female patients regarding the same matters. Thirty-five percent of patients stated that they would feel more comfortable without the medical students’ presence. The study shows a need to pay closer attention to fulfilling patients’ fundamental rights.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of enhanced informed consent compared to standard informed consent to improve patient understanding of early phase oncology clinical trials (CONSENT)

INTRODUCTION

Early phase cancer clinical trials have become increasingly complicated in terms of patient selection and trial procedures-this is reflected in the increasing length of participant information sheets (PIS). Informed consent for early phase clinical trials has been contentious due to the potential ethical issues associated with performing experimental research on a terminally ill population which has exhausted standard treatment options. Empirical studies have demonstrated significant gaps in patient understanding regarding the nature and intent of these trials. This study aims to test whether enhanced informed consent for patient education can improve patient scores on a validated questionnaire testing clinical trial comprehension.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a randomised controlled trial that will allocate patients who are eligible to participate in one of four investigator-initiated clinical trials at the Royal Marsden Drug Development Unit to either a standard arm or an experimental arm, stratified by age and educational level. The standard arm will involve the full length trial PIS, followed by electronic or paper administration of the Quality of Informed Consent Questionnaire Parts A and B (QuIC-A and QuIC-B). The experimental arm will involve the full length trial PIS, exposure to a two-page study aid and 10 online educational videos, followed by administration of the QuIC-A and QuIC-B. The primary endpoint will be the difference (using a one-sided two-sample t-test) in the QuIC-A score, which measures objective understanding, between the standard and experimental arm. Accrual target is at least 17 patients per arm to detect an 8 point difference (80% power, alpha 0.05).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was granted by the National Health Service Health Research Authority on 15 June 2020-IRAS Project ID 277065, Protocol Number CCR5165, REC Reference 20/EE/0155. Results will be disseminated via publication in a relevant journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04407676; Pre-results.