Allocating medical resources fairly: the CSG bioethics guide / Asignación justa de recursos médicos: guía bioética del CSG

Abstract On April 12, 2020, a bioethics guide for allocating scarce hospital resources during the current Covid-19 pandemic was posted on the website of the Consejo de Salubridad General (CSG) of the Government of Mexico. The guide, entitled Guía bioética para asignación de recursos limitados de medicina crítica en situación de emergencia, was intended as a preliminary document, but the website posting did not describe it as a first step in the process. The publicity resulted in a wide array of comments and criticisms. That first version posted on the CSG website contained an age-based criterion for breaking a tie between two or more medically eligible patients who needed of a ventilator: younger patients would have preference over older ones. The final version of the guide eliminated that criterion and instead, relied on the leading public health principle, "save the most lives", without regard to personal characteristics other than the possibility of benefitting from the scarce medical resources.

Resumen El 12 de abril de 2020, se publicó en el sitio web del Consejo de Salubridad General (CSG) del Gobierno de México una guía de bioética para asignar recursos hospitalarios escasos durante la actual pandemia de Covid-19. La guía titulada Guía bioética para asignación de recursos limitados de medicina crítica en situación de emergencia pretendía ser un documento preliminar, pero la publicación en el sitio web no lo describió como un primer paso en el proceso. La publicación resultó en una amplia gama de comentarios y críticas. La primera versión publicada en el sitio web del CSG contenía un criterio basado en la edad para romper el empate entre dos o más pacientes médicamente elegibles que necesitaran un ventilador: los pacientes más jóvenes tendrían preferencia sobre los de mayor edad. La versión final de la guía eliminó ese criterio y, en cambio, se basó en el principio principal de salud pública, "salvar la mayoría de las vidas", sin tener en cuenta las características personales que no sean la posibilidad de beneficiarse de los escasos recursos médicos.

Guía bioética de asignación de recursos de medicina crítica del Consejo de Salubridad General en México / Bioethics guide on scarce medical resource allocation in Mexico

Resumen El tema bioético sobre la asignación de recursos escasos no es nuevo, todos los países que han sido gravemente afectados por el SARS-CoV-2 han tenido que desarrollar y utilizar guías de triaje. Esto resulta más adecuado pues así la asignación de recursos limitados se hace de manera ética y justa, y no de manera discrecional y abierta a la corrupción. En México, en anticipación a la fase exponencial de la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2, el 30 de abril el Consejo de Salubridad General publicó la Guía bioética para asignación de recursos limitados de medicina crítica en situación de emergencia. Dicha guía tiene como base criterios de justicia social y parte de la tesis: todas las vidas tienen el mismo valor. Este texto tiene como objetivo proporcionar las razones bioéticas y biojurídicas que conforman esta guía de triaje en nuestro país. En resumen, proporciona una breve exploración de las razones éticas que justifican cierta manera específica de asignar recursos escasos en medicina crítica, así como del sustento procedimental apegado a los estándares en materia de derechos humanos.

Abstract The bioethical inquiry about allocating fairly scarce health resources is not new, all countries around the world that were seriously afflicted by SARS-CoV-2 have issued triage guidelines in order to address the dilemmas raised by the pandemic. There is no question about the need to create bioethical guidelines, since its creation provides a degree of certainty that fair and ethical decisions are taken. This also prevents that decisions are made in solitary and maybe motivated by corrupted actions. In Mexico, the creation of this guideline was a proactive and preventive measure to what was unavoidable, the exponential contagion phase of the pandemical scenario caused by Covid-19. On April 30, 2020 the General Sanitary Council published the Bioethical Guide to Allocate Scarce Resources on Critical Care Medicine in Emergency Situation. This guide has at its core that principle of utmost importance in social justice which main thesis is: "All lives have the same value". The aim of this contribution is to provide the ethical and legal principles established in the aforementioned bioethical guideline. In sum, a brief exploration of the ethical reasons that support a specific way to allocate scarce health resources is provided, as well as the foundations of the procedural part from a human rights-based approach.

Clinical decision making in older adults with COVID-19 in developing countries: looking beyond chronological age

ABSTRACT Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared a global pandemic. Older adults have been found as a vulnerable group for developing severe forms of disease and increased mortality. Objective: The objective of the study was to propose a pathway to assist the decision-making process for hospital resource allocation for older adults with COVID-19 using simple geriatric assessment-based tools. Methods: We reviewed the available literature at this point of the COVID-19 outbreak, focusing in older adult care to extract key recommendations for those health-care professionals who will be treating older adults in the hospital emergency ward (HEW) in developing countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: We listed a series of easy recommendations for non-geriatrician doctors in the HEW and suggested simple tools for hospital resource allocation during critical care evaluation of older adults with COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries. Conclusions: Age must not be used as the sole criterion for resource allocation among older adults with COVID-19. Simple and efficient tools are available to identify components of the comprehensive geriatric assessment, which could be useful to predict outcomes and provide high-quality care that would fit the particular needs of older adults in resource-limited settings amidst this global pandemic.

Financiamento público, preparação olímpica e aplicação de recursos: o caso da confederação brasileira de handebol / Public funding, olympic preparation and resources application: the case of the brazilian handball confederation

RESUMO Esse estudo, de caráter documental, teve como objetivo investigar o volume e a aplicação de recursos públicos federais da CBHb no período entre 2008 e 2016, em relação as funções estabelecidas às entidades de administração do esporte, pelo Sistema Brasileiro do Desporto. Identificou-se as principais receitas da entidade e coletou-se documentos e prestações de contas (e.g. e-SIC, ME e COB) contendo os valores dos repasses e suas aplicações. Considerou-se apenas os valores executados pela entidade. No período, a CBHb executou R$ 129,6 milhões, que, embora segmentados, teve como a principal fonte os repasses de empresas estatais (41%). Em sua maioria, os recursos apresentaram interrupções e expressivas variações, mas que ao longo do período sofreram um aumento expressivo, justificado pela necessidade de impulsionar a preparação olímpica. Os dados apontaram para uma sobreposição no uso das políticas de financiamento quanto sua aplicação no esporte de elite e suas áreas de atuação. Identificou-se a ausência de uma política estruturada que garanta a oferta de atividades esportivas nas esferas educacionais e de participação que, consequentemente, alimentam o esporte de elite. Além disso, as políticas desenvolvidas se caracterizaram como ações que embora retardem o abandono do esporte, tendem a não estimular a renovação esportiva.

ABSTRACT The purpose of this documentary study was to investigate the amount and allocation of public funding directed to the CBHb in the period between 2008 and 2016, in relation to the functions established to sports federations, by the Brazilian System of Sports. The main revenues of the entity were identified, and documents and accounts (e.g. e-SIC, ME e BOC) that contained the amounts of the onlendings were collected. Were considered only the values executed by the entity. In the period, CBHb executed R $ 129.6 million, which, although segmented, had as its main source the resources coming from state-owned companies (41%). For the most part, resources presented interruptions and significant variations in their onlendings, however, over the period, they suffered a significant increase, justified by the need to boost the Olympic preparation. The data pointed to an overlap in the use of financing policies regarding its application in elite sport and its areas of activity. It was identified the absence of a structured policy that guarantees the provision of sports activities in other spheres that, consequently, feed the elite sport. The policies developed have been characterized as actions that, although delaying the abandonment of sports, tend not to stimulate sports renewal.

Critérios sociais e éticos de priorização de pacientes: uma pesquisa a estudantes e profissionais de saúde em Portugal / Social and ethical criteria for prioritizing patients: a survey of students and health professionals in Portugal

Resumo O estudo quali-quantitativo explora o dilema ético da microalocação dos recursos da saúde. Objetiva identificar e comparar a opinião de dois grupos da sociedade portuguesa - estudantes e profissionais de saúde sobre a importância das características pessoais dos pacientes no momento de os priorizar e se as escolhas se explicam por referenciais bioéticos de caráter utilitaristas ou deontológicos. Os dados foram recolhidos através de um questionário aplicado a uma amostra de 180 estudantes universitários e 60 profissionais de saúde. Os respondentes perante hipotéticos cenários de emergência clínica tiveram de escolher de entre dois pacientes (distinguidos por idade, sexo, responsabilidade social, situação económica e laboral, comportamentos lesivos da saúde e registo criminal) quem tratar e justificar a escolha. Foram usados testes estatísticos de associação para comparar as respostas dos dois grupos e análise de conteúdo para categorizar as justificações. Os resultados sugerem a existência de diferenças nas escolhas dos dois grupos, com os profissionais de saúde a revelarem aceitar menos a utilização de critérios sociais em contexto de escassez e coexistência de critérios utilitaristas e deontológicos, com predomínio da eficiência por parte dos profissionais de saúde e da equidade por parte dos estudantes.

Abstract This qualitative/quantitative study examines the ethical dilemma of microallocation of health resources. It seeks to identify and compare the opinion of two groups in Portuguese society – students and health professionals – on the importance of personal characteristics of patients at the moment of prioritizing them and if the choices can be explained by bioethical references of a utilitarian or deontological nature. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire administered to a sample of 180 students and 60 health professionals. Faced with hypothetical emergency scenarios, the respondents had to choose between two patients (distinguished by: age, gender, social responsibility, economic and employment situation, harmful health behaviors and criminal record), duly selecting who to treat and then justifying their choice. The results suggest the existence of differences in choices between the two groups, with health professionals revealing they are less prepared to accept the use of social criteria in a context of scarce resources and co-existence of utilitarian and deontological criteria, with a predominance of efficiency on the part of health professionals and equity on the part of students.

A necessidade de priorizar o atendimento à pacientes: análise bioética dos argumentos utilizados por médicos na aplicação de recursos limitados na área da saúde / The need to prioritize care to patients: bioethical analysis of the arguments used by physicians in the application of limited resources in health

Os avanços científicos na área da biotecnologia são acompanhados pelo aumento da eficiência dos tratamentos clínicos e do custo da prática da assistência à saúde, e uma das conseqüências deste desenvolvimento é a limitação de recursos financeiros disponíveis para este setor. O objetivo deste estudo foi identificar, analisar e discutir os critérios éticos utilizados por médicos em relação às suas decisões vivenciadas em situações de emergência, frente à recursos limitados. Baseada no marco teórico pretendeu-se avaliar o resultado destes argumentos através da análise racional e imparcial, com as ferramentas da Bioética e, no momento seguinte, refletir sobre a competência das argumentações apresentadas, para responderem aos desafios éticos que se apresentam em relação à micro-alocação de recursos, limitados e finitos, na área da assistência a saúde. A influência explícita dos critérios éticos sobre decisões médicas relativas à priorização do atendimento quando não há recursos para atender a todos poucas vezes foi encontrada na análise das entrevistas e no material da revisão teórica. A proposta do estudo, ao analisar e discutir questões morais para decidir ‘a quem dar tratamento’, foi refletir a respeito de como lidar um pouco melhor com estas difíceis escolhas e propor, na procura por acordos prévios, um amplo debate ético, aberto a participação de toda a sociedade sobre os verdadeiros custos na área da saúde e suas formas alocativas.

The scientific advances in the area of biotechnology are accompanied by the increase of the efficiency of clinical treatments and the cost of health care practice, and one of the consequences of this development is the limitation of financial resources available for this sector. The aim of this study was to identify, analyze and discuss the ethical criteria used by doctors towards its decisions experienced in emergency situations, when facing limited resources. Based on theoretical review it was intended to assess the outcome ofthese arguments through the rational and unbiased analysis, using bioethics tools and subsequently, reflect on the competence of the arguments presented, in order to respond to the ethical challenges that are presented in relation to micro-allocation of limited and finite resources in the area of health care. The influence of ethical criteria about medical decisions concerning the prioritization of care, when there are no resources available toattend everyone, was seldom found explicitly in the analysis of the interviews and in the theoretical review material. The proposal of the study when analyzing and discussing moral issues in order to decide ‘to whom give treatment’, was to reflect about how to handle a little better with these difficult choices and propose, in the search for prior agreements, a broad ethical debate, opened for participation of the entire society about the real costs in the area of health and their forms of allocation.