Balancing the Needs of Acute and Maintenance Dialysis Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Proposed Ethical Framework for Dialysis Allocation.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to strain health care systems and drive shortages in medical supplies and equipment around the world. Resource allocation in times of scarcity requires transparent, ethical frameworks to optimize decision making and reduce health care worker and patient distress. The complexity of allocating dialysis resources for both patients receiving acute and maintenance dialysis has not previously been addressed. Using a rapid, collaborative, and iterative process, BC Renal, a provincial network in Canada, engaged patients, doctors, ethicists, administrators, and nurses to develop a framework for addressing system capacity, communication challenges, and allocation decisions. The guiding ethical principles that underpin this framework are (1) maximizing benefits, (2) treating people fairly, (3) prioritizing the worst-off individuals, and (4) procedural justice. Algorithms to support resource allocation and triage of patients were tested using simulations, and the final framework was reviewed and endorsed by members of the provincial nephrology community. The unique aspects of this allocation framework are the consideration of two diverse patient groups who require dialysis (acute and maintenance), and the application of two allocation criteria (urgency and prognosis) to each group in a sequential matrix. We acknowledge the context of the Canadian health care system, and a universal payer in which this framework was developed. The intention is to promote fair decision making and to maintain an equitable reallocation of limited resources for a complex problem during a pandemic.

Scientists' perspectives on the ethical issues of stem cell research.

This paper describes findings from an ethics education project funded by the Canadian Stem Cell Network (SCN). The project is part of a larger research initiative entitled "The Stem Cell Research Environment: Drawing the Evidence and Experience Together". The ethics education study began with a series of focus groups with SCN researchers and trainees as part of a "needs assessment" effort. The purpose of these discussions was to identify the main ethical issues associated with stem cell (SC) research from the perspective of the stem cell community. This paper will focus on five prominent themes that emerged from the focus group data including: (1) the source of stem cells; (2) the power of stem cells; (3) working within a charged research environment; (4) the regulatory context; and (5) ethics training for scientists. Additional discussions are planned with others involved in Canadian stem cell research (e.g., research ethics board members, policy makers) to supplement initial findings. These assessment results combined with existing bioethics literature will ultimately inform a web-based ethics education module for the SCN. We believe that our efforts are important for those analyzing the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) in this area because our in depth understanding of stem cell researcher perspectives will enable us to develop more relevant and effective education material, which in turn should help SC researchers address the important ethical challenges in their area.

Informed consent in biobank research: a deliberative approach to the debate.

As acknowledged in the literature, public consultation related to biobanks has been largely oriented to assuring and informing rather than seeking considered input. In April and May of 2007, the authors participated in running a deliberative public engagement event in British Columbia, Canada, which sought to enhance public input related to the governance of biobanks. The topic of the event was 'Biobanking in British Columbia (BC)' and at the event a random-digit dialed demographically stratified sample of 21 participants deliberated on what values and interests ought to be considered in the regulation and use of biobanks for health research. In this paper, we report results related to debate over the place of informed consent in biobank research. Drawing on a pre/post-survey and qualitative analysis of event transcripts, we show that participants indicated strong support for biobanks, for a general reduction in concern for withdrawal of samples, and placed a strong emphasis on the need for review of biobanks research that is independent of funders and researchers. In this context, there was persistent disagreement about when consent was required for new research activities.