Ethics, patient rights and staff attitudes in Shanghai's psychiatric hospitals

A comparison of patient-reported quality between inpatient services for mental and physical health: A tertiary-hospital-based survey in China

BACKGROUND

It is widely acknowledged that quality of mental health services is routinely worse than physical health services across countries. However, studies separately investigating mental health services often report high-level satisfaction, even comparing with physical health services. Therefore, this study aimed to compare patient-reported quality between inpatient services for mental and physical health in China.

METHODS

An inpatient survey was conducted among service users of mental and physical health services. Patient-reported quality was measured by the responsiveness performance questionnaire after patient discharge and based on patients' multiple experiences of hospitalization in the past 3 years. Chi-square tests were performed to compare the two patient groups' ratings on inpatient services for mental and physical health, and multivariate logistic regression was performed to adjust covariates in the group comparison.

RESULTS

Inpatient services for mental health were rated better than those for physical health on "treating with respect" (AOR = 3.083, 95% CI = 1.102-8.629) and "choosing a healthcare provider" (AOR = 2.441, 95% CI = 1.263-4.717). However, mental health services had poorer ratings on "asking patient's opinions" (AOR = 0.485, 95% CI = 0.259-0.910). For other responsiveness items, no significant difference was detected between the two types of inpatient services.

CONCLUSION

Mental health inpatient services provided by China's tertiary hospitals could perform as well as physical health inpatient services in most aspects and even better perform regarding dignity and choice of healthcare providers. However, neglecting patients' voices is more severe in inpatient services for mental health.

Infringement of the right to surgical informed consent: negligent disclosure and its impact on patient trust in surgeons at public general hospitals - the voice of the patient

BACKGROUND

There is little dispute that the ideal moral standard for surgical informed consent calls for surgeons to carry out a disclosure dialogue with patients before they sign the informed consent form. This narrative study is the first to link patient experiences regarding the disclosure dialogue with patient-surgeon trust, central to effective recuperation and higher adherence.

METHODS

Informants were 12 Israelis (6 men and 6 women), aged 29-81, who underwent life-saving surgeries. A snowball sampling was used to locate participants in their initial recovery process upon discharge.

RESULTS

Our empirical evidence indicates an infringement of patients' right to receive an adequate disclosure dialogue that respects their autonomy. More than half of the participants signed the informed consent form with no disclosure dialogue, and thus felt anxious, deceived and lost their trust in surgeons. Surgeons nullified the meaning of informed consent rather than promoted participants' moral agency and dignity.

DISCUSSION

Similarity among jarring experiences of participants led us to contend that the conduct of nullifying surgical informed consent does not stem solely from constraints of time and resources, but may reflect an underlying paradox preserving this conduct and leading to objectification of patients and persisting in paternalism. We propose a multi-phase data-driven model for informed consent that attends to patients needs and facilitates patient trust in surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient experiences attest to the infringement of a patient's right to respect for autonomy. In order to meet the prima facie right of respect for autonomy, moral agency and dignity, physicians ought to respect patient's needs. It is now time to renew efforts to avoid negligent disclosure and implement a patient-centered model of informed consent.

Informed consent in clinical practice: patients' experiences and perspectives following surgery

Background

Informed consent during medical practice is an essential component of comprehensive medical care and is a requirement that should be sought all the time the doctor interacts with the patients, though very challenging when it comes to implementation. Since the magnitude and frequency of surgery related risk are higher in a resource limited setting, informed consent for surgery in such settings should be more comprehensive. This study set out to evaluate patients’ experiences and perspectives of informed consent for surgery.

Methods

This was a survey of post-operative patients at three university teaching hospitals in Uganda. The participants were interviewed using guided, semi-structured questionnaires. Patients from different surgical disciplines participated in the study.

Results

A total of 371 patients participated in the study. Eighty percent of the participants reported having been given explanations on the indication for their surgery, 56.1 % had all their questions answered before the operation, 17 % did not know the type of operation they had undergone and another 17 % did not give their consent for the operation. Additionally, more than 81 % of the participants reported giving their own permission for surgery, although only 23.7 % were able to identify the person who obtained consent from them and 22.4 % knew the names of the surgeons who conducted the surgical procedure on them. About 20 % of the participants were not satisfied with the information provided by both the doctor before and after the operation. However, there were varying responses on when doctors should explain to patients with the majority saying it should be done before treatment or surgery, while others thought it should be done on admission, others proposed that it be made immediately after the examination among other responses. On what should be done to improve communication between doctors and patients, a number of suggestions, including the need for a detailed explanation for the patient by the doctor about their disease conditions and treatment options were suggested.

Conclusions

Patients’ perceptions of what constitutes informed consent are diverse and many patients undergo surgery without knowledge of the identity of the surgeon or the reason for the surgery. There is a need to improve on patients’ participation in informed decision making, and this can be achieved through continuing medical education for doctors.

Nurses' knowledge in ethics and their perceptions regarding continuing ethics education: a cross-sectional survey among nurses at three referral hospitals in Uganda

BACKGROUND

High disease burden and scarcity of healthcare resources present complex ethical dilemmas for nurses working in developing countries. We assessed nurses' knowledge in ethics and their perceptions about Continuous Nurses' Ethics Education (CNEE) for in-service nurses.

METHODS

Using an anonymous, pre-tested self-administered questionnaire, we assessed nurses' knowledge in basic ethics concepts at three regional hospitals in Uganda. Adequate knowledge was measured by a score ≥50% in the knowledge assessment test. Nurses' perceptions on CNEE were assessed using a six-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Of 114 nurses, 91% were female; with mean age 44.7 (SD 10) years. Half were diploma, 47 (41%) certificates, 6 (5%) bachelors' degrees and one masters' level training. Overall, 18 (16%) scored ≥50% in the ethics knowledge test. Nurses with diploma or higher level of nursing training were less likely to fail the ethics knowledge than certificate-level nurses (OR 0.14, 95% CI: 0.02-0.7). Only 45% had ever attended at least one CNEE session and up to 93% agreed that CNEE is required to improve nurses' ethics knowledge and practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses exhibited low knowledge in ethics and positive attitudes towards CNEE. We recommend structured CNEE programs to address basic concepts in nursing ethics and their application in clinical practice.

Association between awareness of patient rights and patient's education, seeing bill, and age: a cross-sectional study

Background:

Considering the controversial results of previous reports on awareness of bill of patients’ rights in different regions, as well as the fact that no report is available on the awareness of patients of their rights in teaching hospitals of Sari, we conducted the present study.

Materials and Methods:

This is a cross-sectional Study conducted in teaching hospitals of Sari in 2011. The study population consisted of 336 patients recruited from 4 hospitals affiliated with Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences in Sari, through calculating the selection quota of each hospital. Data were collected through face-to-face interview on discharge, using a two-section questionnaire based on the bill of patient rights and with verified reliability and validity. Data analysis was accomplished on SPSS soft- ware version 10.

Results:

55.4% of patients were women and 44.6% were men. The patients’ mean age was 40.93 ± 15.04 years and the mean length of stay was 4.6 ± 3.34 days. Most patients had elementary education (36%) or were illiterate (25%). The majority (63.4%) had not seen the bill of patients’ rights. 58.9% had poor knowledge, 12% had intermediate knowledge, and 29.1% had good knowledge. As for the articles of the bill, the poorest awareness correlated to the 9^th article (the right to participate or refrain from participating in research). We found a significant relationship between awareness of the bill, and the patient’s education, seeing the bill, and age (p<0.0005).

Conclusion:

The results of the present study indicate that patients are not sufficiently aware of their rights, and this problem requires comprehensive planning to be resolved.