Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 23
Filter
2.
J Med Ethics ; 46(8): 514-525, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467726

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Humanitarian crises and emergencies, events often marked by high mortality, have until recently excluded palliative care-a specialty focusing on supporting people with serious or terminal illness or those nearing death. In the COVID-19 pandemic, palliative care has received unprecedented levels of societal attention. Unfortunately, this has not been enough to prevent patients dying alone, relatives not being able to say goodbye and palliative care being used instead of intensive care due to resource limitations. Yet global guidance was available. In 2018, the WHO released a guide on 'Integrating palliative care and symptom relief into the response to humanitarian emergencies and crises'-the first guidance on the topic by an international body. AIMS: This paper argues that while a landmark document, the WHO guide took a narrowly clinical bioethics perspective and missed crucial moral dilemmas. We argue for adding a population-level bioethics lens, which draws forth complex moral dilemmas arising from the fact that groups having differential innate and acquired resources in the context of social and historical determinants of health. We discuss dilemmas concerning: limitations of material and human resources; patient prioritisation; euthanasia; and legacy inequalities, discrimination and power imbalances. IMPLICATIONS: In parts of the world where opportunity for preparation still exists, and as countries emerge from COVID-19, planners must consider care for the dying. Immediate steps to support better resolutions to ethical dilemmas of the provision of palliative care in humanitarian and emergency contexts will require honest debate; concerted research effort; and international, national and local ethical guidance.


Subject(s)
Bioethical Issues , Delivery of Health Care/ethics , Disaster Planning , Palliative Care/ethics , Pandemics/ethics , Terminal Care/ethics , Altruism , Betacoronavirus , Bioethics , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Critical Care , Decision Making/ethics , Emergencies , Ethics, Clinical , Global Health , Health Care Rationing , Health Equity , Health Resources , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Stress, Psychological
3.
Bioethics ; 35(6): 589-595, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216725

ABSTRACT

This paper applies a relational and familial ethic to address concerns relating to nursing home deaths and advance care planning during Covid-19 and beyond. The deaths of our elderly in nursing homes during this pandemic have been made more complicated by the restriction of visitors even at the end of life, a time when families would normally be present. While we must be vigilant about preventing unnecessary deaths caused by coronavirus outbreaks in nursing homes, some deaths of our elders are inevitable. Thus, it is essential that advanced care planning occurs in a way that upholds the familial and relational aspects of elders' lives that often matter to them the most. We invoke concepts from feminist ethicists like Hilde Lindemann and Eva Kittay and introduce Avery Weisman and Thomas Hackett's concept of "appropriate death" to suggest better ways of planning for those deaths of our elderly that cannot be avoided. Our hope is to allow for deaths that are as meaningful as possible for both the elderly and the family members who survive them.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Family Relations , Family , Homes for the Aged/ethics , Nursing Homes/ethics , Pandemics , Terminal Care/ethics , Advance Care Planning , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks , Ethics , Humans , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care ; 38(6): 731-733, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1076102

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic is devastating the health of hundreds of thousands of people who live and work in U.S. jails and prisons. Due to dozens of large outbreaks in correctional facilities, tens of thousands of seriously ill incarcerated people are receiving medical care in the community hospital setting. Yet community clinicians often have little knowledge of the basic rights and ethical principles governing care of seriously ill incarcerated patients. Such patients are legally entitled to make their own medical decisions just like non-incarcerated patients, and retain rights to appoint surrogate decision makers and make advance care plans. Wardens, correctional officers, and prison health care professionals should not make medical decisions for incarcerated patients and should not be asked to do so. Dying incarcerated patients should be offered goodbye visits with their loved ones, and patients from federal prisons are legally entitled to them. Community health care professionals may need to advocate for this medically vulnerable hospitalized patient population to receive ethically appropriate, humane care when under their care in community hospitals. If ethical care is being obstructed, community health care professionals should contact the prison's warden and medical director to explain their concerns and ask questions. If necessary, community clinicians should involve a hospital's ethics committee, leadership, and legal counsel. Correctional medicine experts and legal advocates for incarcerated people can also help community clinicians safeguard the rights of incarcerated patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/nursing , Palliative Care/ethics , Prisoners/statistics & numerical data , Prisons/organization & administration , Terminal Care/ethics , Attitude of Health Personnel , Humans , Prisoners/psychology , United States , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data
5.
Indian J Med Ethics ; V(3): 189-191, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1034313

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is an amplifier of serious physical suffering and emotional trauma, which together could be all-consuming. It is important for health systems to go beyond methods of prevention and treatment, and focus on the palliation of suffering, and to systematically integrate palliative care into Covid-19 management.

Further, in cases where the triage process indicates poor chances of survival, it is particularly important to respect autonomy by honest and sensitive disclosure of prognosis, and to jointly arrive at goals of care. Hooking every dying person to a ventilator would violate the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. It is also important to ensure at least electronic communication between the patient and family members.

Keywords: Covid-19, palliative care, end of life care, isolation, quarantine, intensive care, ethics of intubation, consent

.


Subject(s)
Beneficence , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/ethics , Moral Obligations , Palliative Care/ethics , Stress, Psychological , Terminal Care/ethics , COVID-19/psychology , Clinical Protocols , Communication , Critical Care/psychology , Family , Fear , Humans , India , Intubation, Intratracheal , Medical Futility , Pain Management , Personal Autonomy , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Isolation
6.
Age Ageing ; 50(2): 294-306, 2021 02 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990552

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has affected the functioning and capacity of healthcare systems worldwide. COVID-19 has also disproportionately affected older adults. In the context of COVID-19, decision-making surrounding place of care (PoC) and place of death (PoD) in older adults involves significant new challenges. AIMS: To explore key factors that influence PoC and PoD decisions in older adults. A secondary aim was to investigate key factors that influence the process and outcome of these decisions in older adults. To apply findings from current evidence to the context of COVID-19. METHODS: Rapid review of reviews, undertaken using WHO guidance for rapid reviews for the production of actionable evidence. Data extracted was synthesised using narrative synthesis, with thematic analysis and tabulation. RESULTS: 10 papers were included for full data extraction. These papers were published between 2005 and 2020. Papers included discussed actual PoD, as well as preferred. Results were divided into papers that explored the process of decision-making, and those that explored decision-making outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The process and outcomes of decision-making for older people are affected by many factors-all of which have the potential to influence both patients and caregivers experience of illness and dying. Within the context of COVID-19, such decisions may have to be made rapidly and be reflexive to changing needs of systems and of families and patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Decision Making, Shared , Palliative Care , Terminal Care , Adaptation, Psychological , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/therapy , Frail Elderly , Humans , Palliative Care/ethics , Palliative Care/psychology , Terminal Care/ethics , Terminal Care/psychology
7.
J Crit Care ; 62: 185-189, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-988304

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose is to explore triggers for moral distress, constraints preventing physicians from doing the right thing and ensuing consequences in making decisions for patients approaching end of life in intensive care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The qualitative study was undertaken in a tertiary referral intensive care unit in Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom. Drawing upon patient case studies of decisions about non escalation and/or withdrawal of life support, we undertook indepth interviews with senior and junior physicians. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and narratively analysed. RESULTS: Eighteen senior and junior physicians involved in 21 patient case studies were interviewed. Analysis determined two predominant themes: key moral distress triggers; and strategies and consequences. Junior residents reported most instances of moral distress, triggered by perceived futility, lack of continuity, protracted decisions and failure to ensure 'good death'. Senior physicians' triggers included constraint of clinical autonomy. Moral distress was far reaching, affecting personal life, working relationships and career choice. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to explore physicians' moral distress in end-of-life decisions in intensive care via a narrative inquiry approach using case studies. Results have implications for the education, recruitment and retention of physicians, relevant in the Covid 19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Morals , Physicians/psychology , Psychological Distress , Terminal Care/ethics , Withholding Treatment , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Northern Ireland , Qualitative Research , United Kingdom
8.
Int Nurs Rev ; 68(2): 181-188, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-966526

ABSTRACT

AIM: To identify factors underlying ethical conflict occurring during the current COVID-19 pandemic in the critical care setting. BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak, Spanish and Italian intensive care units were overwhelmed by the demand for admissions. This fact revealed a crucial problem of shortage of health resources and rendered that decision-making was highly complex. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Applying a nominal group technique this manuscript identifies a series of factors that may have played a role in the emergence of the ethical conflicts in critical care units during the COVID-19 pandemic, considering ethical principles and responsibilities included in the International Council of Nurses Code of Ethics. The five factors identified were the availability of resources; the protection of healthcare workers; the circumstances surrounding decision-making, end-of-life care, and communication. DISCUSSION: The impact of COVID-19 on health care will be long-lasting and nurses are playing a central role in overcoming this crisis. Identifying these five factors and the conflicts that have arisen during the COVID-19 pandemic can help to guide future policies and research. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding these five factors and recognizing the conflicts, they may create can help to focus our efforts on minimizing the impact of the ethical consequences of a crisis of this magnitude and on developing new plans and guidelines for future pandemics. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE AND POLICY: Learning more about these factors can help nurses, other health professionals, and policymakers to focus their efforts on minimizing the impact of the ethical consequences of a crisis of this scale. This will enable changes in organizational policies, improvement in clinical competencies, and development of the scope of practice.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Decision Making/ethics , Ethics, Institutional , Intensive Care Units/ethics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Terminal Care/ethics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology
10.
Cuad Bioet ; 31(102): 203-222, 2020.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-761285

ABSTRACT

The crisis in the health system caused by COVID-19 has left some important humanitarian deficits on how to care for the sick in their last days of life. The humanization of the dying process has been affected in three fundamental aspects, each of which constitutes a medical and ethical duty necessary. In this study, I analyze why dying accompanied, with the possibility of saying goodbye and receiving spiritual assistance, constitutes a specific triad of care and natural obligations that should not be overlooked - even in times of health crisis - if we do not want to see human dignity violated and violated some fundamental rights derived from it.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Death , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Spirituality , Terminal Care/ethics , COVID-19 , Dehumanization , Emotions , Humans , Interpersonal Relations , Moral Obligations , Palliative Care , Patient Comfort , Patient Isolation/ethics , Patient Rights , Personhood , Physician's Role , Religion , SARS-CoV-2 , Terminal Care/methods , Terminal Care/psychology , Visitors to Patients
13.
J Clin Ethics ; 31(2): 191-193, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-616019

ABSTRACT

Public health strategies recommend isolating patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. But compassionate care in the intensive care unit (ICU) is an ethical obligation of modern medicine that cannot be justified by the risk of infection or the lack of personal protective equipment. This article describes the experiences of clinicians in ICUs in the south of Spain promoted by the Andalusian Society of Intensive Care SAMIUC, in the hope it will serve to improve the conditions in which these patients die, and to help their families who suffer when they cannot say good-bye to their loved ones. In the south of Spain, healthcare professionals use daily videoconferencing to improve communication between clinicians, patients, and their relatives who cannot visit them in the ICU. This close communication allows families to see their loved ones and extends communication between healthcare professionals, patients, and their relatives. To allow family members to accompany patients at the end of life, it is possible to adapt public health rules to the epidemic situation.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Illness , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Terminal Care/ethics , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Communication , Empathy , Family , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Pandemics/ethics , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain
14.
Psychol Trauma ; 12(S1): S146-S147, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-598519

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way doctors approach palliative and end-of-life care, which has undoubtedly affected the mental health of patients, families, and health care professionals. Given these circumstances, doctors working on the front line are vulnerable to moral injury and compassion fatigue. This is a reflection of 2 junior doctors experiencing firsthand demands of caring for patients during the outbreak. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Compassion Fatigue , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Medical Staff, Hospital , Palliative Care , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Professional-Family Relations , Psychological Trauma , Terminal Care , Adult , COVID-19 , Compassion Fatigue/etiology , Compassion Fatigue/psychology , England , Humans , Medical Staff, Hospital/ethics , Medical Staff, Hospital/psychology , Morals , Palliative Care/ethics , Palliative Care/psychology , Professional-Family Relations/ethics , Psychological Trauma/etiology , Psychological Trauma/psychology , Terminal Care/ethics , Terminal Care/psychology
16.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 50(3): 71-72, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-619891

ABSTRACT

Ethicists and physicians all over the world have been working on triage protocols to plan for the possibility that the Covid-19 pandemic will result in shortages of intensive care unit beds, ventilators, blood products, or medications. In reflecting on those protocols, many health care workers have noticed that, outside the pandemic shortage situation, we routinely supply patients in the ICU with invasive and painful care that will not help the patients survive even their hospitalization. This is the kind of pointless care that even the most basic protocol would triage against. Perhaps this widespread reflection on triage standards will draw our attention to our ongoing custom of supplying burdensome and inefficacious care to those near the end of life-care that most health care providers would not want for themselves. This essay argues that reflecting on triage could help us improve end-of-life care.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Care Rationing/ethics , Intensive Care Units/ethics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Terminal Care/ethics , Triage/ethics , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Health Care Rationing/organization & administration , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Terminal Care/organization & administration , Triage/organization & administration
17.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 50(3): 58-60, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-619170

ABSTRACT

In recent months, Covid-19 has devastated African American communities across the nation, and a Minneapolis police officer murdered George Floyd. The agents of death may be novel, but the phenomena of long-standing epidemics of premature black death and of police violence are not. This essay argues that racial health and health care disparities, rooted as they are in systemic injustice, ought to carry far more weight in clinical ethics than they generally do. In particular, this essay examines palliative and end-of-life care for African Americans, highlighting the ways in which American medicine, like American society, has breached trust. In the experience of many African American patients struggling against terminal illness, health care providers have denied them a say in their own medical decision-making. In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, African Americans have once again been denied a say with regard to the rationing of scarce medical resources such as ventilators, in that dominant and ostensibly race-neutral algorithms sacrifice black lives. Is there such thing as a "good" or "dignified" death when African Americans are dying not merely of Covid-19 but of structural racism?


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Palliative Care/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Terminal Care/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Health Care Rationing/ethics , Healthcare Disparities/ethics , Humans , Palliative Care/ethics , Pandemics , Racism , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Determinants of Health/ethics , Social Determinants of Health/ethnology , Social Justice , Terminal Care/ethics , Trust , United States/epidemiology
18.
Prof Case Manag ; 25(5): 267-284, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-393684

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This is the second of a 2-part article that discusses essential case management practices and strategies amidst the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The series showcases the potential professional case managers have in support of managing during a crisis such as a global pandemic. Part II continues to describe reenvisioned roles and responsibilities of case managers and their leaders to meet the needs of patients/support systems during the crisis. It focuses on the increased need for end-of-life care, impact on workers' compensation case management practice, and the self-care needs of the professional case manager. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS: Applicable to the various case management practice settings across the continuum of health and human services, with special focus on acute care. FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 global pandemic has resulted in a crisis case managers and other health care professionals never faced something like it before. At the same time, it has provided opportunities for innovation and creativity including use of digital and telecommunication technology in new ways to ensure the continued delivery of health and human services to those who need them regardless of location. It has also resulted in the development of necessary and impactful partnerships within and across different health care organizations and diverse professional disciplines. Most importantly, this pandemic has required special attention to the increased need of patients for timely palliative and end-of-life care. In addition, it has prompted a focus on the safety, health, and well-being of case managers and other health care professionals, resulting in expanded workers' compensation case management practice coupled with the need for self-care and resilience. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: Professional case managers are integral members of interprofessional health care teams. Their roles and responsibilities are even more necessary during the uncertainty of a global pandemic such as COVID-19. So far, the experience of this crisis has resulted in a deliberate need to ensure the safety of both, those who are the recipients of health care services and those who are responsible for the provision of care. Self-care and resilience of health care professionals and case managers, especially due to the complex dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic, have advanced a desirable and necessary view of remote/virtual practice and as a strategy for enhancing the person's health and well-being. This pandemic has forced the development of impactful partnerships and collaborations among the diverse contexts of health care organizations and support service providers. These contexts of care delivery have also emphasized the necessary legal and ethical practice of case managers and the other involved parties. Experts agree that the innovative care delivery methods practiced during the pandemic will undoubtedly remain as desirable beyond the current crisis period.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Case Management , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Resilience, Psychological , Terminal Care , Workers' Compensation , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Incidence , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Terminal Care/ethics , United States/epidemiology , Workers' Compensation/ethics
20.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 60(2): e93-e97, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-102111

ABSTRACT

Family support is more, not less, important during crisis. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, maintaining public safety necessitates restricting the physical presence of families for hospitalized patients. In response, health systems must rapidly adapt family-centric procedures and tools to circumvent restrictions on physical presence. Strategies for maintaining family integrity must acknowledge clinicians' limited time and attention to devote to learning new skills. Internet-based solutions can facilitate the routine, predictable, and structured communication, which is central to family-centered care. But the reliance on technology may compromise patient privacy and exacerbate racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities for populations that lack access to reliable internet access, devices, or technological literacy. We provide a toolbox of strategies for supporting family-centered inpatient care during physical distancing responsive to the current clinical climate. Innovations in the implementation of family involvement during hospitalizations may lead to long-term progress in the delivery of family-centered care.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Family , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Communication , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Hospitalization , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Terminal Care/ethics , Terminal Care/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL