ABSTRACT
Introduction: Rhabdomyolysis is a medical condition that results from damage to striated muscles that causes the release of their components into the bloodstream. Laboratory indications include high levels of creatinine kinase and myoglobin in the serum. Importance: This case report emphasizes the importance of having professional trainers in gyms and training centers who respect trainees' limitations and physical capabilities and ensure that physical exercise programs are being conducted safely and effectively. Case presentation: A 39-year-old female healthcare provider presented to the emergency department at a tertiary/quaternary hospital in Saudi Arabia, with progressive right arm pain, swelling, weakness, and dark urine 2 days after an unaccustomed heavy physical exercise session with her personal trainer following a long pause from physical training. Clinical discussion: Levels of serum creatinine kinase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine transaminase were moderately elevated. There was no evidence of renal impairment, electrolyte disturbance, or coagulopathy. The patient was treated with analgesics, received hydration, and was discharged home under close observation and with a follow-up clinic visit scheduled to check for complications. Data were collected from the hospital's electronic medical records, including clinical notes and laboratory investigations. Conclusion: Awareness campaigns need to be conducted to educate the public about healthy ways to exercise, such as gradually increasing the intensity of physical activity, warming up before exercising, cooling down after each workout, and staying hydrated. It is important that healthcare providers, trainees and trainers are able to recognize the signs of muscular injury following vigorous exercise in order to reduce the incidences of complications that could be deadly if they are not caught and managed early.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Saudi clinical settings, cultural influences can give a patient's family authority to override the patient's autonomous right to make informed health-related decisions. Cultural values should not prevent patients from exercising their genuine preferences when making medical decisions in their own best interests. DISCUSSION: This article discusses the moral implications of family-centred medical decisions for autonomous patients who are competent and capable of making decisions. The author argues that socio-cultural values do not justify the decision to override patient autonomy when patients express a preference for making their own choices. CONCLUSION: The author recommends the use of a model of shared decision-making that accounts for both individual and relational conceptions of autonomy, approaching patients' preferences in all medical encounters with the aim of minimising the potential for socio-cultural values to undermine patient autonomy. Although this approach is a safeguard against both family and medical paternalism, allowance is made for clinicians to act in weakly paternalistic ways when patients at high risk of exacerbating existing medical conditions are likely to benefit from delaying or limiting the disclosure of potentially distressing but non-fatal diagnoses and prognoses. Thus, the author argues that even in a culture that supports family involvement in management decisions, physicians should respect patient autonomy by asking patients for their preferences in the disclosure of their medical diagnoses, prognoses and management options and verifying patients' preferences about the roles they wish their families to play (if any) in health-related decisions.
Subject(s)
Disclosure , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Saudi clinical settings, benevolent family care that reflects strongly held sociocultural values is commonly used to justify overriding respect for patient autonomy. Because the welfare of individuals is commonly regarded as inseparable from the welfare of their family as a whole, these values are widely believed to obligate the family to protect the welfare of its members by, for example, giving the family authority over what healthcare practitioners disclose to patients about their diagnoses and prognoses and preventing them from making informed decisions about their healthcare. DISCUSSION: Family dominance over the healthcare decisions of competent patients is ethically problematic when the family prevent healthcare practitioners from disclosing diagnoses and prognoses to patients who have the capacity to consent and make decisions in their own best interests. Thus, the author holds that sociocultural values ought to be respected only when they do not prevent competent patients from knowing their diagnoses and prognoses or prevent them from making their own decisions. CONCLUSION: Healthcare practitioners should not allow patients' families to control what can or cannot be disclosed to competent patients. This is particularly important when patients are approaching death so that they may address their material and spiritual wishes-among other needs-as they prepare for death. Justification for this position is drawn from the Maqasid Al-Shariah-based Islamic bioethics approach, from which it is possible to argue that the harm of withholding diagnoses and prognoses from patients who are imminently dying outweighs the potential benefits.
