Ethical Implications of Resuming Elective Orthopedic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented impact on the United States health care system. One of the consider-ations was the decision to halt elective orthopedic surgery to preserve consumption of scarce resources. However, as the number of COVID-19 cases decrease, there will be discus-sions regarding the modality of resuming elective orthopedic surgery. Ethical considerations will come to the forefront in terms of determining the best course of action, patient selection, resource rationing, and financial implications. These factors will be examined through the lens of the four tenets of bioethics, beneficence, maleficence, autonomy, and justice, to elucidate the best approach in ethically manag-ing elective orthopedic surgery during a global pandemic.

Maternal request caesareans and COVID-19: the virus does not diminish the importance of choice in childbirth.

It has recently been reported that some hospitals in the UK have placed a blanket restriction on the provision of maternal request caesarean sections (MRCS) as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Pregnancy and birthing services are obviously facing challenges during the current emergency, but we argue that a blanket ban on MRCS is both inappropriate and disproportionate. In this paper, we highlight the importance of MRCS for pregnant people's health and autonomy in childbirth and argue that this remains crucial during the current emergency. We consider some potential arguments-based on pregnant people's health and resource allocation-that might be considered justification for the limitation of such services. We demonstrate, however, that these arguments are not as persuasive as they might appear because there is limited evidence to indicate either that provision of MRCS is always dangerous for pregnant people in the circumstances or would be a substantial burden on a hospital's ability to respond to the pandemic. Furthermore, we argue that even if MRCS was not a service that hospitals are equipped to offer to all pregnant persons who seek it, the current circumstances cannot justify a blanket ban on an important service and due attention must be paid to individual circumstances.

The COVID-19 Pandemic and Plastic Surgery: Literature Review, Ethical Analysis, and Proposed Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), known as the "coronavirus," has spread to over 170 countries. In response, many organizations have spoken out and called for cancellation of all elective surgical procedures. This study aimed to provide clear recommendations for plastic surgeons to follow by addressing the following issues: (1) What defines elective surgery, and where does one draw the line between essential versus nonessential services? (2) How does this differ in the hospital versus private practice setting? (3) If called on to operate on a patient with COVID-19, how do plastic surgeons protect themselves and still provide excellent medical care? METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses systematic review of the literature on plastic surgery in the setting of a pandemic was performed on March 19, 2020. An ethical analysis was conducted using the four principles of medical ethics. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 118 articles. Eighteen articles were relevant and included for analysis. Only one editorial article was published in a plastic surgery journal. Accordingly, no peer-reviewed published COVID-19 guidelines exist for plastic surgery. Given that this pandemic may place health care systems under undue stress with an unpredictable trajectory, it is the responsibility of the plastic surgeon to assess and postpone cases whenever possible to properly contribute to adequate resource allocation and patient safety measures. CONCLUSIONS: This article fills an important gap in the literature by addressing COVID-19 and providing guidelines for upholding ethics and responsible resource allocation. By upholding these standards, plastic surgeons can do their part to help minimize the spread of this virus.

Rethinking "Elective" Procedures for Women's Reproduction during Covid-19.

Common hospital and surgical center responses to the Covid-19 pandemic included curtailing "elective" procedures, which are typically determined based on implications for physical health and survival. However, in the focus solely on physical health and survival, procedures whose main benefits advance components of well-being beyond health, including self-determination, personal security, economic stability, equal respect, and creation of meaningful social relationships, have been disproportionately deprioritized. We describe how female reproduction-related procedures, including abortion, surgical sterilization, reversible contraception devices and in vitro fertilization, have been broadly categorized as "elective," a designation that fails to capture the value of these procedures or their impact on women's overall well-being. We argue that corresponding restrictions and delays of these procedures are problematically reflective of underlying structural views that marginalize women's rights and interests and therefore threaten to propagate gender injustice during the pandemic and beyond. Finally, we propose a framework for triaging reproduction-related procedures during Covid-19 that is more individualized, accounts for their significance for comprehensive well-being, and can be used to inform resumption of operations as well as subsequent restriction phases.

Ethical surgical triage of patients with head and neck cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus has serially overtaken our metropolitan hospitals. At peak, patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome may outnumber mechanical ventilators. In our Miami Hospital System, COVID-19 cases have multiplied for 4 weeks and elective surgery has been suspended. METHODS: An Otolaryngologic Triage Committee was created to appropriately allocate resources to patients. Hospital ethicists provided support. Our tumor conference screened patients for nonsurgical options. Patients were tested twice for coronavirus before performing urgent contaminated operations. N95 masks and protective equipment were conserved when possible. Patients with low-grade cancers were advised to delay surgery, and other difficult decisions were made. RESULTS: Hundreds of surgeries were canceled. Sixty-five cases screened over 3 weeks are tabulated. Physicians and patients expressed discomfort regarding perceived deviations from standards, but risk of COVID-19 exposure tempered these discussions. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the use of actively managed surgical triage to fairly balance our patient's health with public health concerns.