Parental manual ventilation in resource-limited settings: an ethical controversy.
J Med Ethics
; 46(7): 459-464, 2020 07.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-822546
ABSTRACT
Lower respiratory tract infections are a leading cause of paediatric morbidity and mortality worldwide. Children in low-income countries are disproportionately affected. This is in large part due to limitations in healthcare resources and medical technologies. Mechanical ventilation can be a life-saving therapy for many children with acute respiratory failure. The scarcity of functioning ventilators in low-income countries results in countless preventable deaths. Some hospitals have attempted to adapt to this scarcity by using hand-bag ventilation, as either a bridge to a mechanical ventilator, or until clinical improvement occurs rendering mechanical ventilation no longer necessary. In instances of hand-bag ventilation, an endotracheal tube is first placed. Family members are then asked to play the role of a ventilator, manually compressing a bag repeatedly to inflate the child's lungs. This approach is fraught with numerous ethical challenges. A careful examination of the data and a nuanced approach to the ethical considerations are imperative. Ethical arguments in support of and in opposition to allowing parental hand-bag ventilation are explored, including the best interests of the child, the child's right to an open future, beneficence and parental protection, legitimising substandard care, and finally, contextual concerns. An algorithmic, potentially ethically permissible approach to parental participation in manual ventilation is proposed.
Keywords
Full text:
Available
Collection:
International databases
Database:
MEDLINE
Main subject:
Respiration, Artificial
/
Ventilators, Mechanical
Type of study:
Prognostic study
Limits:
Child
/
Humans
Language:
English
Journal:
J Med Ethics
Year:
2020
Document Type:
Article
Affiliation country:
Medethics-2019-105992
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS