V.I.P. care: Ethical dilemmas and recommendations for nurses

Use and impact of the ANA Code: a scoping review

Adherence to professional ethics in nursing is fundamental for high-quality ethical care. However, analysis of the use and impact of nurses' codes of ethics as a part of professional ethics is limited. To fill this gap in knowledge, the aim of our review was to describe the use and impact of the Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements published by the American Nurses Association as an example of one of the earliest and most extensive codes of ethics for nurses with their interpretative statements and constituting a strong basis for the International Council of Nurses' Code of Ethics for Nurses. We based our review on previous literature using a scoping review method. We included both non-scientific and scientific publications to provide an analysis of codes of ethics which can be utilized in development and revision of other nurses' codes of ethics. In the searches, we used CINAHL and PubMed databases limiting publications to texts with a connection to the Code of Ethics for Nurses published from January 2001 to November 2022 and written in English. Searches yielded 1739 references, from which 785 non-scientific and 71 scientific publications were included for analysis of the data. Although non-scientific and scientific publications addressed different number of categories, the results indicated that in the both groups the use and impact focused on professional ethics, nursing practice, and work environment and less on education, research, or social health issues. Nurses' ethical standards were not addressed in non-scientific publications, and clinical issues and leadership were not in focus in scientific publications. To increase evidence-based knowledge of the impact of codes of ethics additional research is needed. Good scientific conduct was followed.

Do VIP medical services damage efficiency? New evidence of medical institutions' total factor productivity using Chinese panel data

This study examines the causal impact of very important person (VIP) medical services on hospital total factor productivity in Deyang, a prefectural-level city in western China, spanning the years 2015-2020. This aims to offer empirical evidence and policy recommendations for the implementation of VIP practices in the medical field. A secondary unbalanced panel dataset of 416 observations was collected from the annual reports of the Health Commission and 92 eligible medical institutions were included. This study utilized a two-stage strategy. First, the Global Malmquist index was used to calculate the total factor productivity and its decomposition terms for hospitals from 2015 to 2020. In the second stage, two-way fixed effects models and Tobit models were used to identify the relationship between VIP medical services and hospital efficiency; instrumental variables were used to solve potential endogeneity problems in the model. The results showed that VIP medical services had a significantly negative impact on medical institutions' efficiency. The technological advances and pure technical efficiency related to VIP medical care may help explain these negative impacts, which were heterogeneous across groups divided by the nature of the hospital and the outside environment. It is imperative to prioritize the standardized provision of VIP medical services for medical institutions, optimize management and service process, enhance the training of clinical and scientific research capabilities of medical personnel, and scientifically allocate resources for both VIP and general medical services. This will help mitigate health inequality while improving the overall quality of medical services.

Exploring nurses' experiences of recommended patient care: a descriptive phenomenological study

BACKGROUND

Caring for recommended patients creates work and emotional challenges for nurses. Nurses are obligated to provide care regardless of the patient's situation. Therefore, knowing the experiences of nurses in dealing with recommended patients in order to provide quality and effective care can be the basis for increasing patient satisfaction. The present study was conducted aimed to explain nurses' experiences of caring for recommended patients.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study with descriptive phenomenological approach. Participants were 12 nurses working in different wards of hospitals affiliated to Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, selected by purposive sampling method with maximum diversity. The data collected using semi-structured interviews in face-to-face and audio-recorded methods. MAXQDA 2020 software was used for data management. The analysis of the data was done using the Colaizzi's 7-step method. In order to verify the trustworthiness of the data, Lincoln and Guba criteria were used.

RESULTS

After continuous data analysis, 110 initial codes were extracted. These codes emerged in 18 sub-themes and 6 main themes including: catastrophe, be in decline, be in progress, discrimination, work overload, and poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed information about the presence of recommended patients in the hospital, which can have consequences for patients and nurses. Therefore, it is advised that nurses provide standard care and avoid any kind of discrimination against all patients regardless of whether the patient is recommended or not.

Evaluation of Standard-of-Care Practices Among Physicians Who Treat Other Physicians: A Qualitative Study

IMPORTANCE

Ethical discussions have suggested that physicians who treat other physicians may put their physician-patients at risk of receiving non-standard-of-care treatment, which may result in worse outcomes. This phenomenon occurs when a physician treats a fellow physician as a VIP (very important person), and is therefore known as VIP syndrome. It is important to assess physicians' perceptions when treating physician-patients.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the physicians treating other physicians have attitudes toward or act in ways that could place physician-patients at risk for VIP syndrome.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 2-part qualitative study was conducted from December 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022. Physicians who worked at a single comprehensive cancer center with experience treating other physicians were eligible to participate. Convenience sampling was used. Emails and flyers were sent out with study information, and if interested, physicians were able to schedule an interview. Of 24 physicians responding, 3 did not have experience treating other physicians, yielding a sample of 21 (88%), which was sufficient to reach a saturation of themes. After the initial structured interview of physicians, follow-up key informant interviews were performed.

EXPOSURES

The structured interview was developed on the basis of a literature review and focused on factors that may contribute to VIP syndrome.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Participant responses to open-ended questions were qualitatively coded using standard multilevel semantic analysis to assess physician perceptions of treating fellow physicians. A series of Likert-scaled questions were used to identify potential contributing factors to VIP syndrome.

RESULTS

Twenty-one physicians (11 men [52%], 11 White [52%], and 15 [71%] younger than 49 years) participated. Although no physician interviewed stated that they altered their usual treatment plans, 11 (52%) agreed that their physician-patients tried to dictate their own care, and 17 (81%) believed that their physician-patients obtained privileges, such as use of medical knowledge to participate in in-depth discussions of care, ability to obtain and use the treating physicians personal contact information, and receiving faster access to care. Eleven respondents (52%) reported increased stress, and 12 (57%) experienced more pressure not to disappoint their physician-patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this qualitative study suggest that when physicians treat other physicians, the physician-patients may obtain privileges unavailable to patients who are not physicians. Therefore, guidelines to help physicians navigate the complex relationships between themselves and their physician-patients are needed to ensure equitable outcomes between physician and nonphysician patients.