1
|
Jakobsen LM, Molewijk B, de Snoo-Trimp J, Svantesson M, Ursin G. What is a High-Quality Moral Case Deliberation?-Facilitators' Perspectives in the Euro-MCD Project. HEC Forum 2024:10.1007/s10730-023-09519-w. [PMID: 38315250 DOI: 10.1007/s10730-023-09519-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 02/07/2024]
Abstract
The evaluation of the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes project (Euro-MCD) has resulted in a revised evaluation instrument, knowledge about the content of MCD (moral case deliberation), and the perspectives of those involved. In this paper, we report on a perspective that has been overlooked, the facilitators'. We aim to describe facilitators' perceptions of high-quality moral case deliberation and their Euro-MCD sessions. The research took place in Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands using a survey combined with interviews with 41 facilitators. Facilitators' perceived that attaining a high-quality MCD implies fostering a safe and respectful atmosphere, creating a wondering mode, being an attentive authority, developing moral reflective skills, reaching a common understanding, and ensuring organisational prerequisites for the MCD sessions. Our central conclusion is that efforts at three levels are required to attain a high-quality MCD: trained and virtuous facilitator; committed, respectful participants; and organizational space. Furthermore, managers have a responsibility to prepare MCD participants for what it means to take part in MCD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena M Jakobsen
- Department of Health and Care Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Harstad, Norway.
- Faculty of Nursing and Health Science, Nord University, Bodø, Norway.
| | - Bert Molewijk
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center of Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Janine de Snoo-Trimp
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mia Svantesson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University Health Care Research Centre, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Gøril Ursin
- Faculty of Nursing and Health Science, Nord University, Bodø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Molewijk B, Pedersen R, Kok A, Førde R, Aasland O. Two years of ethics reflection groups about coercion in psychiatry. Measuring variation within employees' normative attitudes, user involvement and the handling of disagreement. BMC Med Ethics 2023; 24:29. [PMID: 37173770 PMCID: PMC10182617 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-023-00909-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2020] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Research on the impact of ethics reflection groups (ERG) (also called moral case deliberations (MCD)) is complex and scarce. Within a larger study, two years of ERG sessions have been used as an intervention to stimulate ethical reflection about the use of coercive measures. We studied changes in: employees' attitudes regarding the use of coercion, team competence, user involvement, team cooperation and the handling of disagreement in teams. METHODS We used panel data in a longitudinal design study to measure variation in survey scores from multidisciplinary employees from seven departments within three Norwegian mental health care institutions at three time points (T0-T1-T2). Mixed models were used to account for dependence of data in persons who participated more than once. RESULTS In total, 1068 surveys (from 817 employees who did and did not participate in ERG) were included in the analyses. Of these, 7.6% (N = 62) responded at three points in time, 15.5% (N = 127) at two points, and 76.8% (N = 628) once. On average, over time, respondents who participated in ERG viewed coercion more strongly as offending (p < 0.05). Those who presented a case in the ERG sessions showed lower scores on User Involvement (p < 0.001), Team Cooperation (p < 0.01) and Constructive Disagreement (p < 0.01). We observed significant differences in outcomes between individuals from different departments, as well as between different professions. Initial significant changes due to frequency of participation in ERG and case presentation in ERG did not remain statistically significant after adjustment for Departments and Professions. Differences were generally small in absolute terms, possibly due to the low amount of longitudinal data. CONCLUSIONS This study measured specific intervention-related outcome parameters for describing the impact of clinical ethics support (CES). Structural implementation of ERGs or MCDs seems to contribute to employees reporting a more critical attitude towards coercion. Ethics support is a complex intervention and studying changes over time is complex in itself. Several recommendations for strengthening the outcomes of future CES evaluation studies are discussed. CES evaluation studies are important, since-despite the intrinsic value of participating in ERG or MCD-CES inherently aims, and should aim, at improving clinical practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bert Molewijk
- Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Reidar Pedersen
- Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Almar Kok
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science and Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Aging and Later Life, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Reidun Førde
- Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Olaf Aasland
- Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ashida K, Kawashima T, Molewijk AC, de Snoo-Trimp JC, Kawakami A, Tanaka M. Moral distress reduction using moral case deliberation in Japan: A mixed-methods study. Jpn J Nurs Sci 2023:e12528. [PMID: 36758945 DOI: 10.1111/jjns.12528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2022] [Revised: 01/11/2023] [Accepted: 01/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/11/2023]
Abstract
AIMS This study aims to develop and examine the effectiveness of a support program for reducing moral distress of nurses, based on the moral case deliberation methodology, and to study the feasibility of its implementation. METHODS Study design was an intervention study with pre/post-comparison. The support program included a short lecture and three moral case deliberation sessions for nurses working in an acute care hospital. The Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP) and the Euro-MCD (Moral Case Deliberation) 2.0 scale were used for pre/post-comparison, using the Wilcoxon's signed-rank test. Furthermore, post-intervention interviews were conducted with consenting participants to determine the reasons for changes in pre/post-intervention quantitative data. Of the 34 participants, 29 completed the post-questionnaire and were included in the quantitative data analysis, and 27 were included in the qualitative data analysis. RESULTS The mean MMD-HP total scores increased from 147.5 ± 61.0 to 159.3 ± 66.7, but not significantly (p = .375). The mean score of moral competence, a sub-scale of the Euro-MCD 2.0, increased significantly from 15.4 ± 2.4 to 16.4 ± 2.8 after the intervention (p = .036). A qualitative analysis revealed increased moral sensitivity to ethically difficult situations and improved analytical skills as the reasons for change in scores pre/post-intervention. CONCLUSION The results of the qualitative analysis suggested the effectiveness of the intervention. The moral distress score increased, although not significantly, and moral competence also increased, suggesting the participants' values changed after the intervention. It was found that the support program using MCD is expected to improve participants' moral competence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaoru Ashida
- Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.,Kanto Gakuin University, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Tetsuharu Kawashima
- Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan.,Kanto Gakuin University, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Albert C Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Aki Kawakami
- Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan
| | - Makoto Tanaka
- Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rauprich O, Marckmann G, Schildmann J. Relevance of a normative framework for evaluating the impact of clinical ethics support services in healthcare. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2022; 48:987-988. [PMID: 36442970 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2022-108733] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2022] [Accepted: 11/03/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Oliver Rauprich
- Institute for Ethics, History and Theory of Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Georg Marckmann
- Institute for Ethics, History, and Theory of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan Schildmann
- Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Sciences, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/Saale, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
What outcomes of moral case deliberations are perceived important for healthcare professionals to handle moral challenges? A national cross-sectional study in paediatric oncology. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:108. [DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00851-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2022] [Accepted: 10/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
In paediatric oncology, healthcare professionals face moral challenges. Clinical ethics support services, such as moral case deliberation (MCD), aim to assist them in dealing with these challenges. Yet, healthcare professionals can have different expectations and goals related to clinical ethics support services.
Methods
In this study, the perceptions held by healthcare professionals (nursing assistants, registered nurses, physicians, and others) regarding the importance of possible outcomes of MCDs, prior to implementation of MCDs, were investigated. A multisite, cross-sectional, quantitative study was performed at all six Paediatric Oncology Centres in Sweden. Healthcare professionals answered the Euro-MCD instrument with 26 potential MCD outcomes using a scale from Not important (1) to Very important (4). Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were carried out.
Results
All outcomes were rated high, i.e., between 3.12 and 3.78. More open communication, developing skills to analyse ethically difficult situations, better mutual understanding, and deciding on concrete actions were rated as most important. Understanding of ethical theories and critical examination of policies were rated less important. Most often nursing assistants rated higher and physicians lower than the other professions did. Women and participants without previous experience of MCDs perceived outcomes as more important. There were differences between centres as one centre had significantly higher, and one centre had significantly lower ratings compared to the others.
Conclusion
It is clear that healthcare professionals want MCDs to improve teamwork and skills in order to analyse and manage ethically difficult situations. When comparing to previous research about important MCD outcomes, there were similarities in what healthcare professionals consider to be important when handling moral challenges regardless of country and potential differences in healthcare settings and systems, such as paediatric vs. adult care.
Collapse
|
6
|
Bell JAH, Salis M, Tong E, Nekolaichuk E, Barned C, Bianchi A, Buchman DZ, Rodrigues K, Shanker RR, Heesters AM. Clinical ethics consultations: a scoping review of reported outcomes. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:99. [PMID: 36167536 PMCID: PMC9513991 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00832-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Accepted: 08/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clinical ethics consultations (CEC) can be complex interventions, involving multiple methods, stakeholders, and competing ethical values. Despite longstanding calls for rigorous evaluation in the field, progress has been limited. The Medical Research Council (MRC) proposed guidelines for evaluating the effectiveness of complex interventions. The evaluation of CEC may benefit from application of the MRC framework to advance the transparency and methodological rigor of this field. A first step is to understand the outcomes measured in evaluations of CEC in healthcare settings. OBJECTIVE The primary objective of this review was to identify and map the outcomes reported in primary studies of CEC. The secondary objective was to provide a comprehensive overview of CEC structures, processes, and roles to enhance understanding and to inform standardization. METHODS We searched electronic databases to identify primary studies of CEC involving patients, substitute decision-makers and/or family members, clinicians, healthcare staff and leaders. Outcomes were mapped across five conceptual domains as identified a priori based on our clinical ethics experience and preliminary literature searches and revised based on our emerging interpretation of the data. These domains included personal factors, process factors, clinical factors, quality, and resource factors. RESULTS Forty-eight studies were included in the review. Studies were highly heterogeneous and varied considerably regarding format and process of ethical intervention, credentials of interventionist, population of study, outcomes reported, and measures employed. In addition, few studies used validated measurement tools. The top three outcome domains that studies reported on were quality (n = 31), process factors (n = 23), and clinical factors (n = 19). The majority of studies examined multiple outcome domains. All five outcome domains were multidimensional and included a variety of subthemes. CONCLUSIONS This scoping review represents the initial phase of mapping the outcomes reported in primary studies of CEC and identifying gaps in the evidence. The confirmed lack of standardization represents a hindrance to the provision of high quality intervention and CEC scientific progress. Insights gained can inform the development of a core outcome set to standardize outcome measures in CEC evaluation research and enable scientifically rigorous efficacy trials of CEC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer A H Bell
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. .,Department of Supportive Care Research, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. .,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. .,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. .,Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - Marina Salis
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Philosophy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,William Osler Health System, Brampton, ON, Canada
| | - Eryn Tong
- Department of Supportive Care Research, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Erica Nekolaichuk
- Gerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto Libraries, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Claudia Barned
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de Recherches Cliniques de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Andria Bianchi
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Daniel Z Buchman
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Kevin Rodrigues
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ruby R Shanker
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ann M Heesters
- Department of Clinical and Organizational Ethics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Senghor AS, Racine E. How to evaluate the quality of an ethical deliberation? A pragmatist proposal for evaluation criteria and collaborative research. MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2022; 25:309-326. [PMID: 35679005 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-022-10091-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2021] [Revised: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Ethics designates a structured process by which important human values and meanings of life are understood and tackled. Therein, the ability to discuss openly and reflect on (aka deliberation) understandings of moral problems, on solutions to these problems, and to explore what a meaningful resolution could amount to is highly valued. However, the indicators of what constitutes a high-quality ethical deliberation remain vague and unclear. This article proposes and develops a pragmatist approach to evaluate the quality of deliberation. Deliberation features three important moments: (1) broadening and deepening the understanding of the situation, (2) envisioning action scenarios, (3) coming to a judgment based on the comparative evaluation of scenarios. In this paper, we propose seven criteria to evaluate ethical deliberations: (1) collaborative diversity, (2) experiential literacy, (3) organization of experiences, (4) reflective capacity to instrumentalize the experiences of others, (5) interactional creativity, (6) openness of agents, (7) quality of the reformulation of scenarios. These criteria are explained and applied to the three moments of deliberation. Based on these criteria, three kinds of outcomes for deliberations are identified and discussed: good ethical deliberations, partial ethical deliberations, bad ethical deliberations. Our proposal will guide researchers and practitioners interested in the evaluation of the quality of ethical deliberations. It provides a reference tool that allows them to identify the possible limitations of a deliberation and to implement actions aimed at correcting these limitations in order to achieve the desired qualitative objectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdou Simon Senghor
- Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
- Division of Experimental Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Eric Racine
- Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
- Division of Experimental Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.
- Department of Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Quain A, Mullan S, Ward MP. “There Was a Sense That Our Load Had Been Lightened”: Evaluating Outcomes of Virtual Ethics Rounds for Veterinary Team Members. Front Vet Sci 2022; 9:922049. [PMID: 35923822 PMCID: PMC9339959 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.922049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2022] [Accepted: 06/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Clinical ethics support services (CESS) are employed in healthcare to improve patient care and help team members develop skills to recognize and navigate ethically challenging situations (ECS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of ethics rounds, one form of CESS, on veterinary team members. An anonymous, online mixed-methods survey incorporating a 15-item instrument designed to assess the outcomes of moral case deliberation originally developed for human healthcare workers (the Euro-MCD 2.0), was developed. The survey was administered to veterinary team members prior to and following participation in a 90-min virtual ethics rounds session. A total of 23 sessions of virtual ethics rounds were held. In total, 213 individuals participated, and 89 completed both surveys (response rate 41.8%). Most respondents were female (n = 70, 81%). Most were veterinarians (n = 51, 59%), followed by other veterinary team members (practice manager, animal attendant) (n = 18, 21%), veterinary nurses or animal health technicians (n = 10, 12%) and veterinary students (n = 8, 9%). Age ranged from 20 to 73 (median 41, IQR 32–52, n = 87). While there was no statistically significant difference between overall modified Euro-MCD 2.0 scores between T1 and T2, there were statistically significant changes in 7 out of 15 Euro-MCD 2.0 items in the domains of moral competence and moral teamwork. Reflexive thematic analysis of free-text responses identified themes including the types, impact and barriers to resolving ECS, the impacts of ethics rounds on veterinary team members and constraints preventing veterinary team members from speaking up in the face of ECS. While participants largely described the impact of ethics rounds as beneficial (for example, by facilitating clarification of thinking about ECS, allowing participants to see ECS from the perspective of others and providing a safe space for discussion), reflecting on ECS could be stressful for participants. Active participation in ethics rounds may be inhibited in the context of power imbalance, or in settings where bullying occurs. Overall, carefully facilitated ethics rounds has the potential to improve the ability of veterinary team members to identify and navigate ECS, and potentially mitigate moral distress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Quain
- Faculty of Science, Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- *Correspondence: Anne Quain
| | | | - Michael P. Ward
- Faculty of Science, Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Svantesson M, Durnell L, Hammarström E, Jarl G, Sandman L. Moral and exhausting distress working in the frontline of COVID-19: a Swedish survey during the first wave in four healthcare settings. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e055726. [PMID: 35851022 PMCID: PMC9296999 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To describe the prevalence and sources of experienced moral stress and anxiety by Swedish frontline healthcare staff in the early phase of COVID-19. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey, quantitative and qualitative. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING 1074 healthcare professionals (75% nurses) in intensive, ward-based, primary and municipal care in one Swedish county. MEASURES A study-specific closed-ended and an open-ended questionnaire about moral stress and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale measuring anxiety, followed by an open question about anxiety. FINDINGS Moral stress was experienced by 52% of respondents and anxiety by 40%. Moral stress in concern for others attributed to institutional constraints comprised experiences of being deprived of possibilities to respond to humane and professional responsibility. Staff experienced being restricted in fulfilling patients' and families' need for closeness and security as well as being compelled to provide substandard and inhumane care. Uncertainty about right and good, without blame, was also described. However, a burdensome guilt also emerged as a moral distress, blaming oneself. This comprised feeling complicit in the spread of COVID-19, inadequacy in care and carrying patients' suffering. Staff also experienced an exhausting distress as a self-concern in an uncontrollable work situation. This comprised a taxing insecurity by being in limbo, being alone and fear of failing, despair of being deprived control by not being heard; unable to influence; distrusting management; as well as an excessive workload. CONCLUSIONS We have not only contributed with knowledge about experiences of being in the frontline of COVID-19, but also with an understanding of a demarcation between moral stress/distress as a concern for patients and family, and exhausting distress in work situation as self-concern. A lesson for management is that ethics support should first include acknowledgement of self-concern and mitigation of guilt before any structured ethical reflection. Preventive measures for major events should focus on connectedness between all parties concerned, preventing inhumane care and burn-out.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mia Svantesson
- University Health Care Reserach Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Linda Durnell
- University Health Care Reserach Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Erik Hammarström
- University Health Care Reserach Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Gustav Jarl
- University Health Care Reserach Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Lars Sandman
- Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Haltaufderheide J, Nadolny S, Vollmann J, Schildmann J. Framework for evaluation research on clinical ethical case interventions: the role of ethics consultants. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2022; 48:401-406. [PMID: 34006601 PMCID: PMC9132864 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-107129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2020] [Revised: 03/09/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
Evaluation of clinical ethical case consultations has been discussed as an important research task in recent decades. A rigid framework of evaluation is essential to improve quality of consultations and, thus, quality of patient care. Different approaches to evaluate those services appropriately and to determine adequate empirical endpoints have been proposed. A key challenge is to provide an answer to the question as to which empirical endpoints-and for what reasons-should be considered when evaluating the quality of a service. In this paper, we argue for an approach that adopts the role of ethics consultants as its point of departure. In a first step, we describe empirical and ethical characteristics of evaluating clinical ethical case. We show that the mode of action and the explicit normative character of the interventions constitute two characteristics which pose challenges to the selection of appropriate quality criteria and require special attention. In a second step, we outline the way in which an analysis of the role of ethics consultants in the context of a clinical ethical case consultation services can account for the existing challenges by linking empirically measurable endpoints with normative theory. Finally, we discuss practical implications of our model for evaluation research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Stephan Nadolny
- Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
- Nursing Science Staff Unit, Franziskus Hospital Harderberg, Niels-Stensen-Kliniken, Germany
| | - Jochen Vollmann
- Institute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany
| | - Jan Schildmann
- Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
van Heijster H, van Berkel J, Boot CRL, Abma T, de Vet E. Stakeholder dialogue on dilemmas at work as a workplace health promotion intervention including employees with a low SEP: a Responsive Evaluation. BMC Public Health 2022; 22:407. [PMID: 35227228 PMCID: PMC8883621 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-12802-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the perceived changes of an innovative workplace health promotion intervention and evaluation. In this study, a bottom-up approach was taken to define the central themes and relevant outcomes of an intervention. These central themes and relevant outcomes of the intervention were defined together with stakeholders, including employees with a low socioeconomic position. Methods The intervention consisted of a series of structured stakeholder dialogues in which dilemmas around the – by employees defined —health themes were discussed. The intervention was implemented in a harbor service provider with approximately 400 employees. Over a two-year period, 57 participants engaged in eight dialogues of one hour. 15 interviews and six participant observations took place for the evaluation of the intervention. Results Together with the stakeholders, high workload and mental health were defined as central themes for the dialogue intervention in the male-dominated workplace. The dialogue intervention contributed to changes, on different levels: individual, team, and organization. Overall, the stakeholder dialogues advanced the understanding of factors contributing to high workload and mental health. In reply to this, several actions were taken on a organizational level. Conclusions Taking a bottom-up approach in WHP allows to understand the health issues that are important in the daily reality of employees with a low socioeconomic position. Through this understanding, workplace health promotion can become more suitable and relevant for employees with a low socioeconomic position. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register (NRT): NL8051. Registration date: 28/09/2019, Retrospectively registered https://www.trialregister.nl Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-12802-z.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanneke van Heijster
- Department of Social Sciences, Chair Group Consumption & Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, Netherlands.
| | - Jantien van Berkel
- Department of Social Sciences, Chair Group Consumption & Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, Netherlands
| | - Cécile R L Boot
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Tineke Abma
- Department Public Health, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Emely de Vet
- Department of Social Sciences, Chair Group Consumption & Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
de Snoo-Trimp JC, van Gurp JLP, Molewijk AC. Conceptualizing the impact of moral case deliberation: a multiple-case study in a health care institution for people with intellectual disabilities. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:10. [PMID: 35120509 PMCID: PMC8817498 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00747-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2021] [Accepted: 01/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background As moral case deliberations (MCDs) have increasingly been implemented in health care institutions as a form of ethics support, it is relevant to know whether and how MCDs actually contribute to positive changes in care. Insight is needed on what actually happens in daily care practice following MCD sessions. This study aimed at investigating the impact of MCD and exploring how ‘impact of MCD’ should be conceptualized for future research. Methods A multiple-case study was conducted in a care organization for people with intellectual disabilities and/or acquired brain injury, by observing MCD sessions as ‘cases’, followed by interviews with health care professionals concerning the follow-up to these cases, and a focus group with involved MCD facilitators. A conceptual scheme concerning the possible impact formed the basis for analysis: (1) individual moral awareness; (2) the actions of health care professionals; (3) collaboration among health care professionals; (4) the concrete situation of the client; (5) the client’s quality of care and life; (6) the organizational and policy level. Results According to interviewees, their moral awareness and their collaboration, both among colleagues and with clients’ relatives, improved after MCD. Perceived impact on client situation, quality of care/life and the organizational level varied among interviewees or was difficult to define or link to MCD. Three aspects were added to the conceptual scheme concerning the impact of MCD: (a) preparations and expectations prior to the MCD session; (b) a translational step between the conclusions of the MCD session and practical events in the following period, and (c) collaboration with clients’ relatives. A negative impact of MCD was also found on misunderstandings among participants and disappointment about lack of follow-up. Conclusions Concretizing and conceptualizing the ‘impact’ of MCD is complicated as many factors play a role either before or during the transition from MCD to practice. It is important to consider ‘impact’ in a broad sense and to relate it to the goals and context of the MCD in question. Future studies in this field should pay additional attention to the preparations, content and process involved in ethics support, including clients’ and relatives’ experiences. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-022-00747-2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J C de Snoo-Trimp
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, De Boelelaan 1089a, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - J L P van Gurp
- Department IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A C Molewijk
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Center of Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
van Schaik MV, Pasman HR, Widdershoven G, Molewijk B, Metselaar S. CURA-An Ethics Support Instrument for Nurses in Palliative Care. Feasibility and First Perceived Outcomes. HEC Forum 2021; 35:139-159. [PMID: 34888756 PMCID: PMC10167118 DOI: 10.1007/s10730-021-09456-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Evaluating the feasibility and first perceived outcomes of a newly developed clinical ethics support instrument called CURA. This instrument is tailored to the needs of nurses that provide palliative care and is intended to foster both moral competences and moral resilience. This study is a descriptive cross-sectional evaluation study. Respondents consisted of nurses and nurse assistants (n = 97) following a continuing education program (course participants) and colleagues of these course participants (n = 124). Two questionnaires with five-point Likert scales were used. The feasibility questionnaire was given to all respondents, the perceived outcomes questionnaire only to the course participants. Data collection took place over a period of six months. Respondents were predominantly positive on most items of the feasibility questionnaire. The steps of CURA are clearly described (84% of course participants agreed or strongly agreed, 94% of colleagues) and easy to apply (78-87%). The perceived outcomes showed that CURA helped respondents to reflect on moral challenges (71% (strongly) agreed), in perspective taking (67%), with being aware of moral challenges (63%) and in dealing with moral distress (54%). Respondents did experience organizational barriers: only half of the respondents (strongly) agreed that they could easily find time for using CURA. CURA is a feasible instrument for nurses and nurse assistants providing palliative care. However, reported difficulties in organizing and making time for reflections with CURA indicate organizational preconditions ought to be met in order to implement CURA in daily practice. Furthermore, these results indicate that CURA helps to build moral competences and fosters moral resilience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Malene Vera van Schaik
- Amsterdam UMC, Location VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc, De Boelelaan 1089a, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - H Roeline Pasman
- Amsterdam UMC, Location VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Guy Widdershoven
- Amsterdam UMC, Location VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert Molewijk
- Amsterdam UMC, Location VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Centre for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Suzanne Metselaar
- Amsterdam UMC, Location VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Evans N, Marusic A, Foeger N, Lofstrom E, van Hoof M, Vrijhoef-Welten S, Inguaggiato G, Dierickx K, Bouter L, Widdershoven G. Virtue-based ethics and integrity of research: train-the-trainer programme for upholding the principles and practices of the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (VIRT2UE). RESEARCH IDEAS AND OUTCOMES 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/rio.7.e68258] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Recognising the importance of addressing ethics and research integrity (ERI) in Europe, in 2017, the All European Academies (ALLEA) published a revised and updated European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECoC). Consistent application of the ECoC by researchers across Europe will require its widespread dissemination, as well as an innovative training programme and novel tools to enable researchers to truly uphold and internalise the principles and practices listed in the Code.
Aim: VIRT2UE aims to develop a sustainable train-the-trainer blended learning programme enabling contextualised ERI teaching across Europe focusing on understanding and upholding the principles and practices of the ECoC.
Vision: The VIRT2UE project recognises that researchers not only need to have knowledge of the ECoC, but also to be able to truly uphold and internalise the principles underpinning the code. They need to learn how to integrate them into their everyday practice and understand how to act in concrete situations. VIRT2UE addresses this challenge by providing ERI trainers and researchers with an innovative blended (i.e. combined online and off-line approaches) learning programme that draws on a toolbox of educational resources and incorporates an e-learning course (including a YouTube channel) and face-to-face sessions designed to foster moral virtues. ERI trainers and researchers from academia and industry will have open access to online teaching material. Moreover, ERI trainers will learn how to facilitate face-to-face sessions of researchers, which focus on learning how to apply the content of the teaching material to concrete situations in daily practice.
Objectives: VIRT2UE’s work packages (WP) will: conduct a conceptual mapping amongst stakeholders to identify and rank the virtues which are essential for good scientific practice and their relationship to the principles and practices of the ECoC (WP1); identify and consult ERI trainers and the wider scientific community to understand existing capacity and deficiencies in ERI educational resources (WP2); develop the face-to-face component of the train-the-trainer programme which provides trainers with tools to foster researchers’ virtues and promote the ECoC and iteratively develop the programme based on evaluations (WP3); produce educational materials for online learning by researchers and trainers (WP4); implement and disseminate the train-the-trainer programme across Europe, ensuring the training of sufficient trainers for each country and build capacity and consistency by focusing on underdeveloped regions and unifying fragmented efforts (WP5); and develop the online training platform and user interface, which will be instrumental in evaluation of trainers’ and researchers’ needs and project sustainability (WP6).
Impact: The VIRT2UE training programme will promote consistent application of the ECoC across Europe. The programme will affect behaviour on the individual level of trainers and researchers – simultaneously developing an understanding of the ECoC and other ERI issues, whilst also developing scientific virtues, enabling the application of the acquired knowledge to concrete situations and complex moral dilemmas. Through a dedicated embedding strategy, the programme will also have an impact on an institutional level. The train-the-trainer approach multiplies the impact of the programme by reaching current and future European ERI trainers and, subsequently, the researchers they train.
Collapse
|
15
|
Weiner C, Pergert P, Molewijk B, Castor A, Bartholdson C. Perceptions of important outcomes of moral case deliberations: a qualitative study among healthcare professionals in childhood cancer care. BMC Med Ethics 2021; 22:27. [PMID: 33731101 PMCID: PMC7970765 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00597-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2020] [Accepted: 03/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In childhood cancer care, healthcare professionals must deal with several difficult moral situations in clinical practice. Previous studies show that morally difficult challenges are related to decisions on treatment limitations, infringing on the child's integrity and growing autonomy, and interprofessional conflicts. Research also shows that healthcare professionals have expressed a need for clinical ethics support to help them deal with morally difficult situations. Moral case deliberations (MCDs) are one example of ethics support. The aim of this study was to describe the MCD-related outcomes that healthcare professionals in childhood cancer care considered important, before MCDs were implemented, in order to facilitate the implementation of MCDs in childhood cancer care in Sweden.
Methods This study is based on qualitative data. Healthcare professionals, mostly representing registered nurses, nursing assistants and physicians, working at childhood cancer care centres in Sweden, were invited to respond to the translated and content validated European MCD Outcomes Instrument, before participating in regular MCDs. Answers to the main open-ended question, included in the questionnaire, was analysed according to systematic text condensation. Results Data was collected from 161 responses from the healthcare professionals. The responses included healthcare professionals’ perceptions of which MCD-related outcomes they found important for handling moral challenges. Three different themes of important outcomes from the analysis of the data are presented as follows: Interprofessional well-being in team interactions on a team level; Professional comfort when dealing with moral challenges on a personal level; and Improved quality of care for the child and the family on a care level. Conclusions Healthcare professionals in childhood cancer care considered it important that ethics support could enhance the well-being of interprofessional teams, support healthcare professionals on an individual level and improve quality of care. The results of this study can be used in current and future training for MCD-facilitators. When knowing the context specific important MCD-outcomes, the sessions could be adapted. Managers in childhood cancer care would benefit from knowing about the specific important outcomes for their target group because they could then create relevant working conditions for clinical ethics support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte Weiner
- Childhood Cancer Research Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Paediatric Regional Health Care, Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Pernilla Pergert
- Childhood Cancer Research Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Bert Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Center for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Anders Castor
- Paediatrics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.,Pediatric Oncology, Hematology, Immunology and Nephrology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Cecilia Bartholdson
- Childhood Cancer Research Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. .,Paediatric Neurology and Musculoskeletal Disorders and Homecare, Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Svantesson M, Griffiths F, White C, Bassford C, Slowther A. Ethical conflicts during the process of deciding about ICU admission: an empirically driven ethical analysis. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2021; 47:medethics-2020-106672. [PMID: 33402429 PMCID: PMC8639921 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106672] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2020] [Revised: 10/20/2020] [Accepted: 10/25/2020] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Besides balancing burdens and benefits of intensive care, ethical conflicts in the process of decision-making should also be recognised. This calls for an ethical analysis relevant to clinicians. The aim was to analyse ethically difficult situations in the process of deciding whether a patient is admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS Analysis using the 'Dilemma method' and 'wide reflective equilibrium', on ethnographic data of 45 patient cases and 96 stakeholder interviews in six UK hospitals. ETHICAL ANALYSIS Four moral questions and associated value conflicts were identified. (1) Who should have the right to decide whether a patient needs to be reviewed? Conflicting perspectives on safety/security. (2) Does the benefit to the patient of getting the decision right justify the cost to the patient of a delay in making the decision? Preventing longer-term suffering and understanding patient's values conflicted with preventing short-term suffering and provision of security. (3) To what extent should the intensivist gain others' input? Professional independence versus a holistic approach to decision-making. (4) Should the intensivist have an ongoing duty of care to patients not admitted to ICU? Short-term versus longer-term duty to protect patient safety. Safety and security (experienced in a holistic sense of physical and emotional security for patients) were key values at stake in the ethical conflicts identified. The life-threatening nature of the situation meant that the principle of autonomy was overshadowed by the duty to protect patients from harm. The need to fairly balance obligations to the referred patient and to other patients was also recognised. CONCLUSION Proactive decision-making including advance care planning and escalation of treatment decisions may support the inclusion of patient autonomy. However, our analysis invites binary choices, which may not sufficiently reflect reality. This calls for a complementary relational ethics analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mia Svantesson
- University Health Care Research Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Frances Griffiths
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Warwick Medical School, Coventry, UK
| | - Catherine White
- Patient and Public Representative, Trustee, ICUsteps - the Intensive Care Patient Support Charity, Coventry, UK
| | - Chris Bassford
- Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, Coventry, UK
| | - AnneMarie Slowther
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Warwick Medical School, Coventry, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Charre D, Cano N, Malzac P, Habbachi M, Fond G, Boyer L. Mise en place et évaluation de séances d’éthique appliquée dans un service de psychiatrie générale en France. ANNALES MEDICO-PSYCHOLOGIQUES 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.amp.2019.11.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
18
|
Vrouenraets LJJJ, Hartman LA, Hein IM, de Vries ALC, de Vries MC, Molewijk BAC. Dealing with Moral Challenges in Treatment of Transgender Children and Adolescents: Evaluating the Role of Moral Case Deliberation. ARCHIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR 2020; 49:2619-2634. [PMID: 32592076 PMCID: PMC7497454 DOI: 10.1007/s10508-020-01762-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2018] [Revised: 06/03/2020] [Accepted: 06/05/2020] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
Treatment teams providing affirmative medical transgender care to young people frequently face moral challenges arising from the care they provide. An adolescent's capacity to consent, for example, could raise several issues and challenges. To deal with these challenges more effectively, several Dutch treatment teams started using a relatively well-established form of clinical ethics support (CES) called Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). MCD is a facilitator-led, collective moral inquiry based on a real case. This study's purpose is to describe the teams' perceived value and effectiveness of MCD. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation study using MCD session reports, individual interviews, focus groups, and MCD evaluation questionnaires. Our results show that Dutch transgender care providers rated MCD as highly valuable in situations where participants were confronted with moral challenges. The health care providers reported that MCD increased mutual understanding and open communication among team members and strengthened their ability to make decisions and take action when managing ethically difficult circumstances. However, the health care providers also expressed criticisms of MCD: some felt that the amount of time spent discussing individual cases was excessive, that MCD should lead to more practical and concrete results, and that MCD needed better integration and follow-up in the regular work process. We recommend future research on three matters: studying how MCD contributes to the quality of care, involvement of transgender people themselves in MCD, and integration of CES into daily work processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Laura A Hartman
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Irma M Hein
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annelou L C de Vries
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martine C de Vries
- Department of Pediatrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A C Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Field-Testing the Euro-MCD Instrument: Important Outcomes According to Participants Before and After Moral Case Deliberation. HEC Forum 2020; 34:1-24. [PMID: 32770330 PMCID: PMC8813689 DOI: 10.1007/s10730-020-09421-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Ethics support services like Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) intend to support healthcare professionals in ethically difficult situations. To assess outcomes of MCD, the Euro-MCD Instrument has been developed. Field studies to test this instrument are needed and have been conducted, examining important outcomes before MCD participation and experienced outcomes. The current study aimed to (1) describe how participants’ perceive the importance of MCD outcomes after MCD; (2) compare these perceptions with those before MCD participation; and (3) test the factor structure of these outcomes. Swedish, Norwegian and Dutch healthcare professionals rated the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument after four and eight MCDs. Ratings were compared with those before MCD participation using paired and independent samples t-tests. The factor structure was tested using exploratory factor analyses. After 4 and 8 MCDs, 443 respectively 247 respondents completed the instrument. More than 69% rated all MCD outcomes as ‘quite’ or ‘very’ important, especially outcomes from Enhanced Collaboration, Improved Moral Reflexivity and Improved Moral Attitude. Significant differences for 16 outcomes regarding ratings before and after MCD participation were not considered meaningful. Factor analyses suggested three categories, which seemingly resemble the domains Improved Moral Reflexivity, Enhanced Collaboration and a combination of Improved Moral Attitude and Enhanced Emotional Support. After participation in MCDs, respondents confirmed the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument. The question on perceived importance and the categorization of outcomes need reconsideration. The revised instrument will be presented elsewhere, based on all field studies and theoretical reflections.
Collapse
|
20
|
de Snoo-Trimp JC, de Vet HCW, Widdershoven GAM, Molewijk AC, Svantesson M. Moral competence, moral teamwork and moral action - the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes (Euro-MCD) Instrument 2.0 and its revision process. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:53. [PMID: 32616048 PMCID: PMC7331166 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-00493-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Clinical Ethics Support (CES) services are offered to support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations. Evaluation of CES is important to understand if it is indeed a supportive service in order to inform and improve future implementation of CES. Yet, methods to measure outcomes of CES are scarce. In 2014, the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD) was developed to measure outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). To further validate the instrument, we tested it in field studies and revised it. This paper presents the Euro-MCD 2.0 and describes the revision process. Methods The revision process comprised an iterative dialogue among the authors as Euro-MCD-project team, including empirical findings from six Euro-MCD field-studies and input from European experts in CES and theory. Empirical findings contained perceptions and experiences of MCD outcomes among healthcare professionals who participated in MCDs in various settings in Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands. Theoretical viewpoints on CES, literature on goals of CES and MCD and ethics theory guided the interpretation of the empirical findings and final selection of MCD outcomes. Results The Euro-MCD 2.0 Instrument includes three domains: Moral Competence, Moral Teamwork and Moral Action. Moral Competence consists of items about moral sensitivity, analytical skills and virtuous attitude. Moral Teamwork includes open dialogue and supportive relationships and Moral Action refers to moral decision-making and responsible care. During the revision process, we made decisions about adding and reformulating items as well as decreasing the number from 26 to 15 items. We also altered the sentence structure of items to assess the current status of outcomes (e.g. ‘now’) instead of an assumed improvement over time (e.g. ‘better’) and we omitted the question about perceived importance. Conclusions The Euro-MCD 2.0 is shorter, less complex and more strongly substantiated by an integration of empirical findings, theoretical reflections and dialogues with participants and experts. Use of the Euro-MCD 2.0 will facilitate evaluation of MCD and can thereby monitor and foster implementation and quality of MCD. The Euro-MCD 2.0 will strengthen future research on evaluation of outcomes of MCD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J C de Snoo-Trimp
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, De Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - H C W de Vet
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, De Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G A M Widdershoven
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, De Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A C Molewijk
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, De Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Center for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Svantesson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University Health Care Research Center, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Yoon NYS, Ong YT, Yap HW, Tay KT, Lim EG, Cheong CWS, Lim WQ, Chin AMC, Toh YP, Chiam M, Mason S, Krishna LKR. Evaluating assessment tools of the quality of clinical ethics consultations: a systematic scoping review from 1992 to 2019. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:51. [PMID: 32611436 PMCID: PMC7329412 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-00492-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Amidst expanding roles in education and policy making, questions have been raised about the ability of Clinical Ethics Committees (CEC) s to carry out effective ethics consultations (CECons). However recent reviews of CECs suggest that there is no uniformity to CECons and no effective means of assessing the quality of CECons. To address this gap a systematic scoping review of prevailing tools used to assess CECons was performed to foreground and guide the design of a tool to evaluate the quality of CECons. METHODS Guided by Levac et al's (2010) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews, the research team performed independent literature reviews of accounts of assessments of CECons published in six databases. The included articles were independently analyzed using content and thematic analysis to enhance the validity of the findings. RESULTS Nine thousand sixty-six abstracts were identified, 617 full-text articles were reviewed, 104 articles were analyzed and four themes were identified - the purpose of the CECons evaluation, the various domains assessed, the methods of assessment used and the long-term impact of these evaluations. CONCLUSION This review found prevailing assessments of CECons to be piecemeal due to variable goals, contextual factors and practical limitations. The diversity in domains assessed and tools used foregrounds the lack of minimum standards upheld to ensure baseline efficacy. To advance a contextually appropriate, culturally sensitive, program specific assessment tool to assess CECons, clear structural and competency guidelines must be established in the curation of CECons programs, to evaluate their true efficacy and maintain clinical, legal and ethical standards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas Yue Shuen Yoon
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Yun Ting Ong
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Hong Wei Yap
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, 59 Nanyang Dr, Experimental Medicine Building, Singapore, 636921, Singapore
| | - Kuang Teck Tay
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Elijah Gin Lim
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Clarissa Wei Shuen Cheong
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Wei Qiang Lim
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore
| | - Annelissa Mien Chew Chin
- Medical Library, National University of Singapore Libraries, National University of Singapore, Blk MD6, Centre, 14 Medical Dr, #05-01 for Translational Medicine, Singapore, 117599, Singapore
| | - Ying Pin Toh
- Department of Family Medicine, National University Health System, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074, Singapore
| | - Min Chiam
- Division of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
| | - Stephen Mason
- Palliative Care Institute Liverpool, Academic Palliative & End of Life Care Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Lalit Kumar Radha Krishna
- Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore.
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
- Division of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Level 4, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore, 169610, Singapore.
- Palliative Care Institute Liverpool, Academic Palliative & End of Life Care Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
- Cancer Research Centre, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK.
- Centre of Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Blk MD11, 10 Medical Drive, #02-03, Singapore, 117597, Singapore.
- Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Spronk B, Widdershoven G, Alma H. Addressing harm in moral case deliberation: the views and experiences of facilitators. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:10. [PMID: 32000784 PMCID: PMC6993317 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-0450-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2019] [Accepted: 01/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In healthcare practice, care providers are confronted with decisions they have to make, directly affecting patients and inevitably harmful. These decisions are tragic by nature. This study investigates the role of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) in dealing with tragic situations. In MCD, caregivers reflect on real-life dilemmas, involving a choice between two ethical claims, both resulting in moral damage and harm. One element of the reflection process is making explicit the harm involved in the choice. How harmful are our decisions? We investigated how facilitators of MCD experience the importance of addressing harm in MCD and what participants learn from reflecting on harm. METHODS The study was qualitative, focusing on the views and experiences of the facilitators of MCD. Semi-structured interviews (N = 12) were conducted with facilitators of MCD. The research focuses on the subjective experiences of facilitators. Grounded Theory was used for analysis. RESULTS The results show two main categories. The first concerns the awareness of tragedy. Within this category, five themes were discerned: making explicit that there is no solution, visualizing consequences, uncovering pain, focusing on emotion, and exploring perspectives on harm. The second category concerns the support for healthcare professionals in dealing with the tragedy of the choices they face. In this category, five themes came forward: acknowledging, offering comfort, managing harm, consideration through dialogue and repairing harm. CONCLUSION Our study shows that addressing harm in MCD in tragic situations provides an important moral learning opportunity for participants. By formulating and becoming aware of harm, MCD aids healthcare professionals in the task they are faced with, namely making difficult and painful choices. MCD helps healthcare professionals to repair moral damage, making clear at the same time that harm cannot be undone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benita Spronk
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Postbus 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | - Guy Widdershoven
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1089 a, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hans Alma
- Department of Philosophy and Ethics, VUB (Vrije Universiteit Brussel), Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussel, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
McClimans L, Pressgrove G, Campbell E. Objectives and outcomes of clinical ethics services: a Delphi study. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2019; 45:761-769. [PMID: 31484784 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2018-105203] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2018] [Revised: 07/19/2019] [Accepted: 08/01/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore the objectives and outcomes most appropriate for evaluating clinical ethics support services (CESs) in the USA. METHODS A three-round e-Delphi was sent to two professional medical ethics listservs (Medical College of Wisconsin-Bioethics and American Society for Bioethics and Humanities) as well as 19 individual experts. The survey originally contained 15 objectives and 9 outcomes. In round 1, participants were asked to validate the content of these lists. In round 2, we had 17 objectives and 10 outcomes, and participants were asked to rank them for appropriateness in a top 10 list of objectives and a top 5 list of outcomes. RESULTS Participants came to a high(at least 70%) level of agreement on seven objectives: mediate, educate, develop policy, improve the moral quality of a decision or action, counsel, create a moral space and manage moral distress. Participants came to a moderate (at least 51%) level of agreement on three objectives: empower, awareness of ethics and preventative ethics. Participants also came to a moderate (at least 51%) level of agreement on five outcomes: ethical justification, transformation of institution, improvement of quality of life, principled consensus and satisfaction with the expertise of a CES. CONCLUSION This e-Delphi identified 10 objectives and 5 outcomes that are a good starting point for developing outcome measures to evaluate CESs in the USA, while reminding us of the diversity of perspectives still evident in the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leah McClimans
- Philosophy, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA
| | - Geah Pressgrove
- Reed College of Media, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
| | - Emmaling Campbell
- Philosophy, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Van Baarle EM, Potma MC, van Hoek MEC, Hartman LA, Molewijk BAC, van Gurp JLP. Lessons learned from implementing a responsive quality assessment of clinical ethics support. BMC Med Ethics 2019; 20:78. [PMID: 31675970 PMCID: PMC6824048 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0418-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2019] [Accepted: 10/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Various forms of Clinical Ethics Support (CES) have been developed in health care organizations. Over the past years, increasing attention has been paid to the question of how to foster the quality of ethics support. In the Netherlands, a CES quality assessment project based on a responsive evaluation design has been implemented. CES practitioners themselves reflected upon the quality of ethics support within each other's health care organizations. This study presents a qualitative evaluation of this Responsive Quality Assessment (RQA) project. METHODS CES practitioners' experiences with and perspectives on the RQA project were collected by means of ten semi-structured interviews. Both the data collection and the qualitative data analysis followed a stepwise approach, including continuous peer review and careful documentation of the decisions. RESULTS The main findings illustrate the relevance of the RQA with regard to fostering the quality of CES by connecting to context specific issues, such as gaining support from upper management and to solidify CES services within health care organizations. Based on their participation in the RQA, CES practitioners perceived a number of changes regarding CES in Dutch health care organizations after the RQA: acknowledgement of the relevance of CES for the quality of care; CES practices being more formalized; inspiration for developing new CES-related activities and more self-reflection on existing CES practices. CONCLUSIONS The evaluation of the RQA shows that this method facilitates an open learning process by actively involving CES practitioners and their concrete practices. Lessons learned include that "servant leadership" and more intensive guidance of RQA participants may help to further enhance both the critical dimension and the learning process within RQA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva M Van Baarle
- Netherlands Defense Academy, Breda, the Netherlands. .,Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Marieke C Potma
- Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Care Ethics, University of Humanistic Studies (UvH), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Maria E C van Hoek
- Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Laura A Hartman
- Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), EMGO+, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A C Molewijk
- Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), EMGO+, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Centre for Medical Ethics at the University of Oslo (UIO), Oslo, Norway
| | - Jelle L P van Gurp
- Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,IQ Healthcare Department, Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Svantesson M, de Snoo-Trimp JC, Ursin G, de Vet HCW, Brinchmann BS, Molewijk B. Important outcomes of moral case deliberation: a Euro-MCD field survey of healthcare professionals' priorities. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2019; 45:608-616. [PMID: 31320403 PMCID: PMC6817990 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104745] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2018] [Revised: 06/04/2019] [Accepted: 06/05/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a lack of empirical research regarding the outcomes of such clinical ethics support methods as moral case deliberation (MCD). Empirical research in how healthcare professionals perceive potential outcomes is needed in order to evaluate the value and effectiveness of ethics support; and help to design future outcomes research. The aim was to use the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome Instrument (Euro-MCD) instrument to examine the importance of various MCD outcomes, according to healthcare professionals, prior to participation. METHODS A North European field survey among healthcare professionals drawn from 73 workplaces in a variety of healthcare settings in the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The Euro-MCD instrument was used. RESULTS All outcomes regarding the domains of moral reflexivity, moral attitude, emotional support, collaboration, impact at organisational level and concrete results, were perceived as very or quite important by 76%-97% of the 703 respondents. Outcomes regarding collaboration and concrete results were perceived as most important. Outcomes assessed as least important were mostly about moral attitude. 'Better interactions with patient/family' emerged as a new domain from the qualitative analysis. Dutch respondents perceived most of the outcomes as significantly less important than the Scandinavians, especially regarding emotional support. Furthermore, men, those who were younger, and physician-respondents scored most of the outcomes as statistically significantly less important compared with the other respondents. CONCLUSIONS The findings indicate a need for a broad instrument such as the Euro-MCD. Outcomes related to better interactions between professionals and patients must also be included in the future. The empirical findings raise the normative question of whether outcomes that were perceived as less important, such as moral reflexivity and moral attitude outcomes, should still be included. In the future, a combination of empirical findings (practice) and normative reflection (theories) will contribute to the revision of the instrument.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mia Svantesson
- University Health Care Research Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Janine C de Snoo-Trimp
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Göril Ursin
- Faculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway
| | - Henrica CW de Vet
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bert Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center of Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Racine E, Cascio MA, Montreuil M, Bogossian A. Instrumentalist analyses of the functions of ethics concept-principles: a proposal for synergetic empirical and conceptual enrichment. THEORETICAL MEDICINE AND BIOETHICS 2019; 40:253-278. [PMID: 31587142 DOI: 10.1007/s11017-019-09502-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
Bioethics has made a compelling case for the role of experience and empirical research in ethics. This may explain why the movement for empirical ethics has such a firm grounding in bioethics. However, the theoretical framework according to which empirical research contributes to ethics-and the specific role(s) it can or should play-remains manifold and unclear. In this paper, we build from pragmatic theory stressing the importance of experience and outcomes in establishing the meaning of ethics concepts. We then propose three methodological steps according to which the meaning of ethics concepts can be refined based on experience and empirical research: (1) function identification, (2) function enrichment, and (3) function testing. These steps are explained and situated within the broader commitment of pragmatic ethics to a perspective of moral growth and human flourishing (eudaimonia). We hope that this proposal will give specific direction to the bridging of theoretical and empirical research in ethics and thus support stronger actualization of ethics concepts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Racine
- Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
- Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
- McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.
| | - M Ariel Cascio
- Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
- Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI, USA
| | - Marjorie Montreuil
- Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
- McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Aline Bogossian
- Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
- Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Mertz M, Fischer T, Salloch S. The value of bioethical research: A qualitative literature analysis of researchers' statements. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0220438. [PMID: 31356629 PMCID: PMC6663028 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220438] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2018] [Accepted: 07/16/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Value and waste in preclinical and clinical research projects are intensively debated in biomedicine at present. Such different aspects as the need for setting objectives and priorities, improving study design, quality of reporting, and problematic incentives of the academic reward system are addressed. While this debate is also fueled by ethical considerations and thus informed by bioethical research, up to now, the field of bioethics lacks a similar extensive debate. Nonetheless, bioethical research should not go unquestioned regarding its scientific or social value. What exactly constitutes the value of bioethical research, however, remains widely unclear so far. Methods This explorative study investigated possible value dimensions for bioethical research by conducting a qualitative literature analysis of researchers’ statements about the value of their studies. 40 bioethics articles published 2015 in four relevant journals (The American Journal of Bioethics, Bioethics, BMC Medical Ethics and Journal of Medical Ethics) were analyzed. The value dimensions of “advancing knowledge” (e.g. research results that are relevant for science itself and for further research) and “application” (e.g. increasing applicability of research results in practice) were used as main deductive categories for the analysis. Further subcategories were inductively generated. Results The analysis resulted in 62 subcategories representing a wide range of value dimensions for bioethical research. Of these, 45 were subcategories of “advancing knowledge” and 17 of “application”. In 21 articles, no value dimensions related to “application” was found; the remaining 19 articles mentioned “advancing knowledge” as well as “application”. The value dimensions related to “advancing knowledge” were, in general, more fine-grained. Conclusions Even though limitations arise regarding the sample, the study revealed a plethora of value dimensions that can inform further debates about what makes bioethical research valuable for science and society. Besides theoretical reflections on the value of bioethics more meta-research in bioethics is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcel Mertz
- Institute of History, Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
- * E-mail:
| | - Tobias Fischer
- Institute of Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
- Clinic for Dermatology and Venereology, University Medical Center Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Sabine Salloch
- Institute of Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Schildmann J, Nadolny S, Haltaufderheide J, Gysels M, Vollmann J, Bausewein C. Do we understand the intervention? What complex intervention research can teach us for the evaluation of clinical ethics support services (CESS). BMC Med Ethics 2019; 20:48. [PMID: 31307458 PMCID: PMC6633613 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0381-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2018] [Accepted: 06/16/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evaluating clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been hailed as important research task. At the same time, there is considerable debate about how to evaluate CESS appropriately. The criticism, which has been aired, refers to normative as well as empirical aspects of evaluating CESS. MAIN BODY In this paper, we argue that a first necessary step for progress is to better understand the intervention(s) in CESS. Tools of complex intervention research methodology may provide relevant means in this respect. In a first step, we introduce principles of "complex intervention research" and show how CESS fulfil the criteria of "complex interventions". In a second step, we develop a generic "conceptual framework" for "ethics consultation on request" as standard for many forms of ethics consultation in clinical ethics practice. We apply this conceptual framework to the model of "bioethics mediation" to make explicit the specific structural and procedural elements of this form of ethics consultation on request. In a final step we conduct a comparative analysis of two different types of CESS, which have been subject to evaluation research: "proactive ethics consultation" and "moral case deliberation" and discuss implications for evaluating both types of CESS. CONCLUSION To make explicit different premises of implemented CESS interventions by means of conceptual frameworks can inform the search for sound empirical evaluation of CESS. In addition, such work provides a starting point for further reflection about what it means to offer "good" CESS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Schildmann
- Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Str. 8, 06112, Halle, Germany.
| | - Stephan Nadolny
- Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Str. 8, 06112, Halle, Germany
- Institute for educational and health-care research in the health sector (InBVG), Bielefeld University of Applied Sciences, Interaktion 1, 33619, Bielefeld, Germany
- University of Applied Sciences for Diakonia, Bethelweg 8, 33617, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Joschka Haltaufderheide
- Institute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr-University Bochum, Markstr. 258a, 44779, Bochum, Germany
| | - Marjolein Gysels
- Centre for Social Science and Global Health, University of Amsterdam, AHTC, Tower C4, Paasheuvelweg 25, 1105, BP Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jochen Vollmann
- Institute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr-University Bochum, Markstr. 258a, 44779, Bochum, Germany
| | - Claudia Bausewein
- Department of Palliative Medicine, Munich University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Silén M, Svantesson M. Impact of clinical ethics support on daily practice-First-line managers' experiences in the Euro-MCD project. J Nurs Manag 2019; 27:1374-1383. [PMID: 31220384 DOI: 10.1111/jonm.12818] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2018] [Revised: 05/21/2019] [Accepted: 06/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
AIM To explore first-line managers' experiences of what Moral Case Deliberation has meant for daily practice, to describe perceptions of context influence and responsibility to manage ethically difficult situations. BACKGROUND In order to find measures to evaluate Moral Case Deliberation, the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome instrument was developed and is now in the stage of revision. For this, there is a need of several perspectives, one of them being the managerial bird-eye perspective. METHOD Eleven first-line managers at workplaces, participating in the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome instrument project, were interviewed and thematic analysis was applied. RESULTS Managers' experiences were interpreted as enhanced ethical climate: a closer-knit and more emotionally mature team, morally strengthened individuals, as well as ethics leaving its marks on everyday work and morally grounded actions. Despite organizational barriers, they felt inspired to continue ethics work. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS This study confirmed, but also added ethical climate aspects, such as morally grounded actions. Furthermore, adding ethical climate as a construct in the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome instrument should be considered. First-line managers need clear directives from their managers that ethics work needs to be prioritized for the good of both the staff and the patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marit Silén
- Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.,Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Mia Svantesson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University Health Care Research Center, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Hartman L, Widdershoven G, de Vries A, Wensing-Kruger A, Heijer MD, Steensma T, Molewijk B. Integrative Clinical Ethics Support in Gender Affirmative Care: Lessons Learned. HEC Forum 2019; 31:241-260. [PMID: 31098934 DOI: 10.1007/s10730-019-09376-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Clinical ethics support (CES) for health care professionals and patients is increasingly seen as part of good health care. However, there is a key drawback to the way CES services are currently offered. They are often performed as isolated and one-off services whose ownership and impact are unclear. This paper describes the development of an integrative approach to CES at the Center of Expertise and Care for Gender Dysphoria (CEGD) at Amsterdam University Medical Center. We specifically aimed to integrate CES into daily work processes at the CEGD. In this paper, we describe the CES services offered there in detail and elaborate on the 16 lessons we learned from the process of developing an integrative approach to CES. These learning points can inform and inspire CES professionals, who wish to bring about greater integration of CES services into clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Hartman
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Guy Widdershoven
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annelou de Vries
- Centre of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annelijn Wensing-Kruger
- Centre of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martin den Heijer
- Centre of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas Steensma
- Centre of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Faculty of Medicine, Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Wasson K, Adams WH, Berkowitz K, Danis M, Derse AR, Kuczewski M, McCarthy M, Parsi K, Tarzian A. What Is the Minimal Competency for a Clinical Ethics Consult Simulation? Setting a Standard for Use of the Assessing Clinical Ethics Skills (ACES) Tool. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2019; 10:164-172. [PMID: 31295060 PMCID: PMC6921700 DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1634653] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Background: The field of clinical ethics is examining ways of determining competency. The Assessing Clinical Ethics Skills (ACES) tool offers a new approach that identifies a range of skills necessary in the conduct of clinical ethics consultation and provides a consistent framework for evaluating these skills. Through a training website, users learn to apply the ACES tool to clinical ethics consultants (CECs) in simulated ethics consultation videos. The aim is to recognize competent and incompetent clinical ethics consultation skills by watching and evaluating a videotaped CEC performance. We report how we set a criterion cut score (i.e., minimally acceptable score) for judging the ability of users of the ACES tool to evaluate simulated CEC performances. Methods: A modified Angoff standard-setting procedure was used to establish the cut score for an end-of-life case included on the ACES training website. The standard-setting committee viewed the Futility Case and estimated the probability that a minimally competent CEC would correctly answer each item on the ACES tool. The committee further adjusted these estimates by reviewing data from 31 pilot users of the Futility Case before determining the cut score. Results: Averaging over all 31 items, the proposed proportion correct score for minimal competency was 80%, corresponding to a cut score that is between 24 and 25 points out of 31 possible points. The standard-setting committee subsequently set the minimal competency cut score to 24 points. Conclusions: The cut score for the ACES tool identifies the number of correct responses a user of the ACES tool training website must attain to "pass" and reach minimal competency in recognizing competent and incompetent skills of the CECs in the simulated ethics consultation videos. The application of the cut score to live training of CECs and other areas of practice requires further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Wasson
- Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics and Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, 2160 S. 1st Ave., Bldg 120, Room 284, Maywood, IL 60153
| | - WH Adams
- Medical Education and Public Health Sciences, Loyola University Chicago Health Sciences Division, 2160 S. 1st Ave. CTRE Room 253, Maywood, IL 60153
| | | | | | - AR Derse
- Center for Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Julia and David Uihlein Professor of Medical Humanities and Professor of Bioethics and Emergency Medicine, Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI 53226-0509
| | - M Kuczewski
- The Fr. Michael I. English, SJ, Professor of Medical Ethics, Chair, Dept. of Medical Education, Director, Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics, Loyola University Chicago, 2160 S. 1st Ave., Bldg 120, Room 285, Maywood, IL 60153
| | - M McCarthy
- Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics and Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, 2160 S. 1st Ave., Bldg 120, Room 286, Maywood, IL 60153
| | - K Parsi
- Bioethics, Graduate Program Director, Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics and Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, 2160 S. First Avenue, Bldg. 120, Room 283, Maywood, IL 60153
| | - A Tarzian
- Maryland Health Care Ethics Committee Network (MHECN), Law & Health Care Program, Maryland Carey Law,University of Maryland School of Nursing, 655 W. Lombard St., Suite 552, Baltimore, MD 21201
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Hartman LA, Metselaar S, Molewijk AC, Edelbroek HM, Widdershoven GAM. Developing an ethics support tool for dealing with dilemmas around client autonomy based on moral case deliberations. BMC Med Ethics 2018; 19:97. [PMID: 30577790 PMCID: PMC6303905 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0335-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2017] [Accepted: 12/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Moral Case Deliberations (MCDs) are reflective dialogues with a group of participants on their own moral dilemmas. Although MCD is successful as clinical ethics support (CES), it also has limitations. 1. Lessons learned from individual MCDs are not shared in order to be used in other contexts 2. Moral learning stays limited to the participants of the MCD; 3. MCD requires quite some organisational effort, 4. MCD deals with one individual concrete case. It does not address other, similar cases (it is case based). These limitations warrant research into complementary ways of providing CES to healthcare professionals. Our research objective was therefore to develop a low threshold CES tool based on a series of MCDs on autonomy in long-term care. METHODS We used a qualitative research design in which we analyzed the process and content of a series of MCDs, combined with reflections on the theoretical background of MCD. In total 28 MCDs (10 transcripts and 18 summary reports) were analyzed by means of a thematic content analysis. In various rounds of development, the results of the analysis were combined with theoretical reflections on CES. Consequently, the tool was evaluated in three focus groups and adjusted. RESULTS The CES tool, called 'moral compass', guides the users through a series of six subsequent questions in order to methodically reflect on their concrete moral dilemma, in the form of a booklet of 23 pages. It combines a methodical element that encourages and structures a reflection process with a substantive element, including norms, values, options, strategies, and insights regarding dealing with client autonomy. CONCLUSION By using data from a series of MCDs, combined with theoretical reflections on MCD, ethics support and moral learning, we developed a thematic, low-threshold CES tool that supports healthcare professionals in daily practice in dealing with moral questions regarding client autonomy. It integrates examples and insights from earlier MCDs on the same topic. The moral compass is not a replacement of, but can be used complementary to MCD. The feasibility and impact of the moral compass need to be investigated in an evaluative follow-up study. The methodology presented in this paper may be used to develop moral compasses on different topics in various healthcare organizations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L. A. Hartman
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, APH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Metselaar
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, APH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A. C. Molewijk
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, APH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - H. M. Edelbroek
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. A. M. Widdershoven
- Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, APH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Heidenreich K, Bremer A, Materstvedt LJ, Tidefelt U, Svantesson M. Relational autonomy in the care of the vulnerable: health care professionals' reasoning in Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2018; 21:467-477. [PMID: 29243015 PMCID: PMC6267250 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-017-9818-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
In Moral Case Deliberation (MCD), healthcare professionals discuss ethically difficult patient situations in their daily practice. There is a lack of knowledge regarding the content of MCD and there is a need to shed light on this ethical reflection in the midst of clinical practice. Thus, the aim of the study was to describe the content of healthcare professionals' moral reasoning during MCD. The design was qualitative and descriptive, and data consisted of 22 audio-recorded inter-professional MCDs, analysed with content analysis. The moral reasoning centred on how to strike the balance between personal convictions about what constitutes good care, and the perceived dissonant care preferences held by the patient. The healthcare professionals deliberated about good care in relation to demands considered to be unrealistic, justifications for influencing the patient, the incapacitated patient's nebulous interests, and coping with the conflict between using coercion to achieve good while protecting human dignity. Furthermore, as a basis for the reasoning, the healthcare professionals reflected on how to establish a responsible relationship with the vulnerable person. This comprised acknowledging the patient as a susceptible human being, protecting dignity and integrity, defining their own moral responsibility, and having patience to give the patient and family time to come to terms with illness and declining health. The profound struggle to respect the patient's autonomy in clinical practice can be understood through the concept of relational autonomy, to try to secure both patients' influence and at the same time take responsibility for their needs as vulnerable humans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaja Heidenreich
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, University Health Care Research Center, Örebro University, Box 1613, 701 16, Örebro, Sweden.
| | - Anders Bremer
- Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden
- PreHospen - Centre for Prehospital Research, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden
| | - Lars Johan Materstvedt
- Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Faculty of Humanities, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
- Glasgow End of Life Studies Group, School of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Glasgow, Dumfries Campus, Scotland, UK
| | - Ulf Tidefelt
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, University Health Care Research Center, Örebro University, Box 1613, 701 16, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Mia Svantesson
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, University Health Care Research Center, Örebro University, Box 1613, 701 16, Örebro, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Defining and categorizing outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD): concept mapping with experienced MCD participants. BMC Med Ethics 2018; 19:88. [PMID: 30454047 PMCID: PMC6245560 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0324-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2018] [Accepted: 10/22/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations, Clinical Ethics Support (CES) services like Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) are increasingly implemented. To assess the impact of CES, it is important to evaluate outcomes. Despite general claims about outcomes from MCD experts and some qualitative research, there exists no conceptual analysis of outcomes yet. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically define and categorize MCD outcomes. An additional aim was to compare these outcomes with the outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument from 2014, to further validate this Instrument. METHODS The concept mapping method was used and involves qualitative and quantitative steps including brainstorming, individual structuring, computation of concept maps (by principal component analysis and cluster analysis), group interpretation and utilization. In total, 12 experienced MCD participants from a variety of professional backgrounds participated in two sessions. RESULTS The focus group brainstorm resulted in a list of 85 possible MCD outcomes, of which a point map and concept maps were constructed. After a thorough discussion of each cluster, final consensus was reached on the names and position of 8 clusters of MCD outcomes: 1) Organisation and Policy; 2) Team development; 3) Personal development focused on the Other Person; 4) Personal development as Professional, focused on Skills; 5) Personal development as Professional, focused on Knowledge; 6) Personal development as an Individual; 7) Perception and Connection; and 8) Concrete action. CONCLUSIONS This study explored and categorized MCD outcomes in a concept mapping focus group. When comparing the results with the Euro-MCD Instrument, our study confirms that outcomes of MCD can be categorized in clusters referring to the organisational level, team development, personal development (both as an individual and a professional) and the concrete case-level. In developing CES evaluation tools, it is important to be explicit if an outcome refers to the individual or the team, to knowledge or skills, to the organisation or the specific case. The findings will be used in the further validation of the Euro-MCD Instrument. The current study further contributes to the field of evaluating CES in general and defining outcomes of MCD in particular.
Collapse
|
35
|
Haan MM, van Gurp JLP, Naber SM, Groenewoud AS. Impact of moral case deliberation in healthcare settings: a literature review. BMC Med Ethics 2018; 19:85. [PMID: 30400913 PMCID: PMC6219174 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0325-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2018] [Accepted: 10/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND An important and supposedly impactful form of clinical ethics support is moral case deliberation (MCD). Empirical evidence, however, is limited with regard to its actual impact. With this literature review, we aim to investigate the empirical evidence of MCD, thereby a) informing the practice, and b) providing a focus for further research on and development of MCD in healthcare settings. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science (June 2016). Both the data collection and the qualitative data analysis followed a stepwise approach, including continuous peer review and careful documentation of our decisions. The qualitative analysis was supported by ATLAS.ti. RESULTS Based on a qualitative analysis of 25 empirical papers, we identified four clusters of themes: 1) facilitators and barriers in the preparation and context of MCD, i.e., a safe and open atmosphere created by a facilitator, a concrete case, commitment of participants, a focus on the moral dimension, and a supportive organization; 2) changes that are brought about on a personal and inter-professional level, with regard to professional's feelings of relief, relatedness and confidence; understanding of the perspectives of colleagues, one's own perspective and the moral issue at stake; and awareness of the moral dimension of one's work and awareness of the importance of reflection; 3) changes that are brought about in caring for patients and families; and 4) changes that are brought about on an organizational level. CONCLUSIONS This review shows that MCD brings about changes in practice, mostly for the professional in inter-professional interactions. Most reported changes are considered positive, although challenges, frustrations and absence of change were also reported. Empirical evidence of a concrete impact on the quality of patient care is limited and is mostly based on self-reports. With patient-focused and methodologically sound qualitative research, the practice and the value of MCD in healthcare settings can be better understood, thus making a stronger case for this kind of ethics support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike M. Haan
- Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Geert Grooteplein 21, P.O. Box 9101 (114), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jelle L. P. van Gurp
- Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Geert Grooteplein 21, P.O. Box 9101 (114), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Simone M. Naber
- Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Geert Grooteplein 21, P.O. Box 9101 (114), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A. Stef Groenewoud
- Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Geert Grooteplein 21, P.O. Box 9101 (114), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Rasoal D, Skovdahl K, Gifford M, Kihlgren A. Clinical Ethics Support for Healthcare Personnel: An Integrative Literature Review. HEC Forum 2017; 29:313-346. [PMID: 28600658 PMCID: PMC5688194 DOI: 10.1007/s10730-017-9325-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
This study describes which clinical ethics approaches are available to support healthcare personnel in clinical practice in terms of their construction, functions and goals. Healthcare personnel frequently face ethically difficult situations in the course of their work and these issues cover a wide range of areas from prenatal care to end-of-life care. Although various forms of clinical ethics support have been developed, to our knowledge there is a lack of review studies describing which ethics support approaches are available, how they are constructed and their goals in supporting healthcare personnel in clinical practice. This study engages in an integrative literature review. We searched for peer-reviewed academic articles written in English between 2000 and 2016 using specific Mesh terms and manual keywords in CINAHL, MEDLINE and Psych INFO databases. In total, 54 articles worldwide described clinical ethics support approaches that include clinical ethics consultation, clinical ethics committees, moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups, and ethics reflection groups. Clinical ethics consultation and clinical ethics committees have various roles and functions in different countries. They can provide healthcare personnel with advice and recommendations regarding the best course of action. Moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups and ethics reflection groups support the idea that group reflection increases insight into ethical issues. Clinical ethics support in the form of a "bottom-up" perspective might give healthcare personnel opportunities to think and reflect more than a "top-down" perspective. A "bottom-up" approach leaves the healthcare personnel with the moral responsibility for their choice of action in clinical practice, while a "top-down" approach risks removing such moral responsibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dara Rasoal
- School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Fakultetsgatan 1, SE - 701 82, Örebro, Sweden.
| | - Kirsti Skovdahl
- Department of Nursing and Health Sciences, University College in Southeast Norway, Drammen, Norway
| | - Mervyn Gifford
- School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Fakultetsgatan 1, SE - 701 82, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Annica Kihlgren
- School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Fakultetsgatan 1, SE - 701 82, Örebro, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Tønnessen S, Ursin G, Brinchmann BS. Care-managers' professional choices: ethical dilemmas and conflicting expectations. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:630. [PMID: 28882150 PMCID: PMC5590170 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2578-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2017] [Accepted: 08/29/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Care-managers are responsible for the public administration of individual healthcare decisions and decide on the volume and content of community healthcare services given to a population. The purpose of this study was to investigate the conflicting expectations and ethical dilemmas these professionals encounter in their daily work with patients and to discuss the clinical implications of this. METHODS The study had a qualitative design. The data consisted of verbatim transcripts from 12 ethical reflection group meetings held in 2012 at a purchaser unit in a Norwegian city. The participants consist of healthcare professionals such as nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and social workers. The analyses and interpretation were conducted according to a hermeneutic methodology. This study is part of a larger research project. RESULTS Two main themes emerged through the analyses: 1. Professional autonomy and loyalty, and related subthemes: loyalty to whom/what, overruling of decisions, trust and obligation to report. 2. Boundaries of involvement and subthemes: private or professional, care-manager or provider and accessibility. CONCLUSIONS Underlying values and a model illustrating the dimensions of professional responsibility in the care-manager role are suggested. The study implies that when allocating services, healthcare professionals need to find a balance between responsibility and accountability in their role as care-managers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siri Tønnessen
- University College of Southeast Norway, Campus Vestfold, 3603 Kongsberg, Norway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Seekles W, Widdershoven G, Robben P, van Dalfsen G, Molewijk B. Inspectors' ethical challenges in health care regulation: a pilot study. MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2017; 20:311-320. [PMID: 28130719 PMCID: PMC5569140 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-016-9736-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
There is an increasing body of research on what kind of ethical challenges health care professionals experience regarding the quality of care. In the Netherlands the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate is responsible for monitoring and regulating the quality of health care. No research exists on what kind of ethical challenges inspectors experience during the regulation process itself. In a pilot study we used moral case deliberation as method in order to reflect upon inspectors' ethical challenges. The objective of this paper is to give an overview of the ethical challenges which health care inspectors encounter in their daily work. A thematic qualitative analysis was performed on cases (n = 69) that were collected from health care inspectors in a moral case deliberation pilot study. Eight themes were identified in health care regulation. These can be divided in two categories: work content and internal collaboration. The work of the health care inspectorate is morally loaded and our recommendation is that some form of ethics support is provided for health care inspectors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Seekles
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre (EMGO+), Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- University of Humanistic Studies, Kromme Nieuwegracht 29, 3512 HD, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - G Widdershoven
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre (EMGO+), Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P Robben
- The Health Care Inspectorate (IGZ), Stadsplateau 1, 3521 AZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G van Dalfsen
- The Health Care Inspectorate (IGZ), Stadsplateau 1, 3521 AZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B Molewijk
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre (EMGO+), Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Centre for Medical Ethics, HELSAM, University of Oslo, Forskningsveien 3A, 0373, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Svantesson M, Silén M, James I. It’s not all about moral reasoning: Understanding the content of Moral Case Deliberation. Nurs Ethics 2017; 25:212-229. [DOI: 10.1177/0969733017700235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Background: Moral Case Deliberation is one form of clinical ethics support described as a facilitator-led collective moral reasoning by healthcare professionals on a concrete moral question connected to their practice. Evaluation research is needed, but, as human interaction is difficult to standardise, there is a need to capture the content beyond moral reasoning. This allows for a better understanding of Moral Case Deliberation, which may contribute to further development of valid outcome criteria and stimulate the normative discussion of what Moral Case Deliberation should contain. Objective: To explore and compare the content beyond moral reasoning in the dialogue in Moral Case Deliberation at Swedish workplaces. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was applied for analysing audio-recordings of 70 periodic Moral Case Deliberation meetings at 10 Swedish workplaces. Moral Case Deliberation facilitators and various healthcare professions participated, with registered nurses comprising the majority. Ethical considerations: No objection to the study was made by an Ethical Review Board. After oral and written information was provided, consent to be recorded was assumed by virtue of participation. Findings: Other than ‘moral reasoning’ (median (md): 45% of the spoken time), the Moral Case Deliberations consisted of ‘reflections on the psychosocial work environment’ to a varying extent (md: 29%). Additional content comprised ‘assumptions about the patient’s psychosocial situation’ (md: 6%), ‘facts about the patient’s situation’ (md: 5%), ‘concrete problem-solving’ (md: 6%) and ‘process’ (md: 3%). Conclusion: The findings suggest that a restorative function of staff’s wellbeing in Moral Case Deliberation is needed, as this might contribute to good patient care. This supports outcome criteria of improved emotional support, which may include relief of moral distress. However, facilitators need a strategy for how to proceed from the participants’ own emotional needs and to develop the use of their emotional knowing to focus on the ethically difficult patient situation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marit Silén
- University of Gävle, Sweden; Uppsala University, Sweden
| | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Palliative sedation challenging the professional competency of health care providers and staff: a qualitative focus group and personal written narrative study. BMC Palliat Care 2017; 16:25. [PMID: 28399846 PMCID: PMC5387333 DOI: 10.1186/s12904-017-0198-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2016] [Accepted: 04/04/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Despite recent advances in palliative medicine, sedating a terminally ill patient is regarded as an indispensable treatment to manage unbearable suffering. With the prospect of widespread use of palliative sedation, the feelings and representations of health care providers and staff (carers) regarding sedation must be carefully explored if we are to gain a better understanding of its impact and potential pitfalls. The objective of the study was to provide a comprehensive description of the opinions of carers about the use of sedation practices in palliative care units (PCU), which have become a focus of public attention following changes in legislation. Methods Data were collected using a qualitative study involving multi-professional focus groups with health care providers and staff as well as personal narratives written by physicians and paramedical staff. A total of 35 medical and paramedical providers volunteered to participate in focus group discussions in three Palliative Care Units in two French hospitals and to write personal narratives. Results Health care provider and staff opinions had to do with their professional stance and competencies when using midazolam and practicing sedation in palliative care. They expressed uncertainty regarding three aspects of the comprehensive care: biomedical rigour of diagnosis and therapeutics, quality of the patient/provider relationship and care to be provided. Focusing on the sedative effect of midazolam and continuous sedation until death, the interviewed health care providers examined the basics of their professional competency as well as the key role played by the health care team in terms of providing support and minimizing workplace suffering. Nurses were subject to the greatest misgivings about their work when they were called upon to sedate patients. Conclusions The uncertainty experienced by the carers with regard to the medical, psychosocial and ethical justification for sedation is a source of psychological burden and moral distress, and it has proved to be a major source of suffering in the workplace. Lastly, the study shows the uncertainty can have the positive effect of prompting the care team to devise ways to deal with it.
Collapse
|
41
|
Rasoal D, Kihlgren A, James I, Svantesson M. What healthcare teams find ethically difficult. Nurs Ethics 2016; 23:825-837. [DOI: 10.1177/0969733015583928] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Background: Ethically difficult situations are frequently encountered by healthcare professionals. Moral case deliberation is one form of clinical ethics support, which has the goal to support staff to manage ethical difficulties. However, little is known which difficult situations healthcare teams need to discuss. Aim: To explore which kinds of ethically difficult situations interprofessional healthcare teams raise during moral case deliberation. Research design: A series of 70 moral case deliberation sessions were audio-recorded in 10 Swedish workplaces. A descriptive, qualitative approach was applied, using thematic content analysis. Ethical considerations: An advisory statement specifying no objections to the study was provided from an Ethical Review Board, and consent to be recorded was assumed by virtue of participation in the moral case deliberation. Findings: Three themes emerged: powerlessness over managing difficult interactions with patients and next-of-kin, unease over unsafe and unequal care, and uncertainty over who should have power over care decisions. The powerlessness comprised feelings of insufficiency, difficulties to respond or manage patient’s/next-of-kin’s emotional needs or emotional outbursts and discouragement over motivating patients not taking responsibility for themselves. They could be uncertain over the patient’s autonomy, who should have power over life and death, disclosing the truth or how much power next-of-kin should have. Discussion: The findings suggest that the nature of the ethically difficult situations brought to moral case deliberations contained more relational-oriented ethics than principle-based ethics, were permeated by emotions and the uncertainties were pervaded by power aspects between stakeholders. Conclusion: MCD can be useful in understanding the connection between ethical issues and emotions from a team perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Mia Svantesson
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, Örebro University, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Seekles W, Widdershoven G, Robben P, van Dalfsen G, Molewijk B. Evaluation of moral case deliberation at the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate: a pilot study. BMC Med Ethics 2016; 17:31. [PMID: 27209161 PMCID: PMC4875757 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-016-0114-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2016] [Accepted: 05/11/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Moral case deliberation (MCD) as a form of clinical ethics support is usually implemented in health care institutions and educational programs. While there is no previous research on the use of clinical ethics support on the level of health care regulation, employees of regulatory bodies are regularly confronted with moral challenges. This pilot study describes and evaluates the use of MCD at the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate (IGZ). The objective of this pilot study is to investigate: 1) the current way of dealing with moral issues at the IGZ; 2) experience with and evaluation of MCD as clinical ethics support, and 3) future preferences and (perceived) needs regarding clinical ethics support for dealing with moral questions at the IGZ. METHODS We performed an explorative pilot study. The research questions were assessed by means of: 1) interviews with MCD participants during four focus groups; and 2) interviews with six key stakeholders at the IGZ. De qualitative data is illustrated by data from questionnaires on MCD outcomes, perspective taking and MCD evaluation. RESULTS Professionals do not always recognize moral issues. Employees report a need for regular and structured moral support in health care regulation. The MCD meetings are evaluated positively. The most important outcomes of MCD are feeling secure and learning from others. Additional support is needed to successfully implement MCD at the Inspectorate. CONCLUSION We conclude that the respondents perceive moral case deliberation as a useful form of clinical ethics support for dealing with moral questions and issues in health care regulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wike Seekles
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,University of Humanistic Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Guy Widdershoven
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul Robben
- The Health Care Inspectorate (IGZ), Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Institute of Health Policy and Management (iBMG), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bert Molewijk
- Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Centre of Medical Ethics, HELSAM, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Pearlman RA, Foglia MB, Fox E, Cohen JH, Chanko BL, Berkowitz KA. Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool: A Novel Method for Assessing the Quality of Ethics Case Consultations Based on Written Records. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2016; 16:3-14. [PMID: 26913651 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1134704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
Although ethics consultation is offered as a clinical service in most hospitals in the United States, few valid and practical tools are available to evaluate, ensure, and improve ethics consultation quality. The quality of ethics consultation is important because poor quality ethics consultation can result in ethically inappropriate outcomes for patients, other stakeholders, or the health care system. To promote accountability for the quality of ethics consultation, we developed the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool (ECQAT). ECQAT enables raters to assess the quality of ethics consultations based on the written record. Through rigorous development and preliminary testing, we identified key elements of a quality ethics consultation (ethics question, consultation-specific information, ethical analysis, and conclusions and/or recommendations), established scoring criteria, developed training guidelines, and designed a holistic assessment process. This article describes the development of the ECQAT, the resulting product, and recommended future testing and potential uses for the tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert A Pearlman
- a National Center for Ethics in Health Care , Department of Veterans Affairs
| | - Mary Beth Foglia
- a National Center for Ethics in Health Care , Department of Veterans Affairs
| | | | - Jennifer H Cohen
- a National Center for Ethics in Health Care , Department of Veterans Affairs
| | - Barbara L Chanko
- a National Center for Ethics in Health Care , Department of Veterans Affairs
| | - Kenneth A Berkowitz
- a National Center for Ethics in Health Care , Department of Veterans Affairs
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Enjoo SA, Amini M, Tabei SZ, Mahbudi A, Kavosi Z, Saber M. The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation. JOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN MEDICAL EDUCATION & PROFESSIONALISM 2015; 3:117-32. [PMID: 26269789 PMCID: PMC4530002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2015] [Accepted: 04/26/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The application of organizational ethics in hospitals is one of the novel ways to improve medical ethics. Nowadays achieving efficient and sufficient ethical hospital indicators seems to be inevitable. In this connection, the present study aims to determine the best indicators in hospital accreditation. METHODS 69 indicators in 11 fields to evaluate hospital ethics were achieved through a five-step qualitative and quantitative study including literature review, expert focus group, Likert scale survey, 3 rounded Delphi, and content validity measurement. Expert focus group meeting was conducted, employing Nominal Group Technique (NGT). After running NGT, a three rounded Delphi and parallel to Delphi and a Likert scale survey were performed to obtain objective indicators for each domain. The experts were all healthcare professionals who were also medical ethics researchers, teachers, or PhD students. Content validity measurements were computed, using the viewpoints of two different expert groups, some ethicists, and some health care professionals (n=46). RESULTS After conducting NGT, Delphi, Likert survey, 11 main domains were listed including: Informed consent, Medical confidentiality, Physician-patient economic relations, Ethics consultation policy in the hospital, Ethical charter of hospital, Breaking bad medical news protocol, Respect for the patients' rights, Clinical ethics committee, Spiritual and palliative care unit programs in the hospitals, Healthcare professionals' communication skills, and Equitable access to the healthcare. Also 71 objective indicators for these 11 domains were listed in 11 tables with 5 to 8 indicators per table. Content Validity Ratio (CVR) measurements were done and 69 indicators were highlighted. CONCLUSION The domains listed in this study seem to be the most important ones for evaluating hospital ethics programs and services. Healthcare organizations' accreditation and ranking are crucial for the improvement of healthcare services. Ethics programs would also motivate hospitals to improve their services and move towards patients' satisfaction. In this regard, more involvement of bioethicists can help healthcare organizations to develop ethics programs and ensure ethics-based practice in hospitals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seyed Ali Enjoo
- Medical Ethics Department, Medical School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mitra Amini
- Quality Improvement in Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Seyed Ziaadin Tabei
- Medical Ethics Department, Medical School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Ali Mahbudi
- Quality Improvement in Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Zahra Kavosi
- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mahboobeh Saber
- Medical Ethics Department, Medical School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Janssens RMJPA, van Zadelhoff E, van Loo G, Widdershoven GAM, Molewijk BAC. Evaluation and perceived results of moral case deliberation. Nurs Ethics 2014; 22:870-80. [DOI: 10.1177/0969733014557115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Background: Moral case deliberation is increasingly becoming part of various Dutch healthcare organizations. Although some evaluation studies of moral case deliberation have been carried out, research into the results of moral case deliberation within aged care is scarce. Research questions: How did participants evaluate moral case deliberation? What has moral case deliberation brought to them? What has moral case deliberation contributed to care practice? Should moral case deliberation be further implemented and, if so, how? Research design: Quantitative analysis of a questionnaire study among participants of moral case deliberation, both caregivers and team leaders. Qualitative analysis of written answers to open questions, interview study and focus group meetings among caregivers and team leaders. Participants and research context: Caregivers and team leaders in a large organization for aged care in the Netherlands. A total of 61 moral case deliberation sessions, carried out on 16 care locations belonging to the organization, were evaluated and perceived results were assessed. Ethical considerations: Participants gave informed consent and anonymity was guaranteed. In the Netherlands, the law does not prescribe independent ethical review by an Institutional Review Board for this kind of research among healthcare professionals. Findings: Moral case deliberation was evaluated positively by the participants. Content and atmosphere of moral case deliberation received high scores, while organizational issues regarding the moral case deliberation sessions scored lower and merit further attention. Respondents indicated that moral case deliberation has the potential to contribute to care practice as relationships among team members improve, more openness is experienced and more understanding for different perspectives is fostered. If moral case deliberation is to be successfully implemented, top-down approaches should go hand in hand with bottom-up approaches. Conclusion: The relevance of moral case deliberation for care practice received wide acknowledgement from the respondents. It can contribute to the team’s cohesion as mutual understanding for one another’s views is fostered. If implemented well, moral case deliberation has the potential to improve care, according to the respondents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ger van Loo
- Moral Case Deliberation Committee at Sevagram, Organisation for Elderly Care, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bert AC Molewijk
- VU University Medical Center EMGO+, The Netherlands; University of Oslo, Centre for Medical Ethics, Norway
| |
Collapse
|