The ethical foundations of patient-centered care in aesthetic medicine.

This article addresses some critical aspects of the relationship between aesthetic medicine (AM) and ethics and proposes a possible deontological ethical line to pursue based on current practices. The role of AM has always been controversial and suffers from unclear practical and moral boundaries, even within academic settings, since it aims to improve the appearance of individuals, not to cure a disease. Today, it is essential and pertinent to discuss these issues, as AM specialists are dealing with a growing and increasingly demanding patient population that has undergone profound evolution in recent years. Current challenges within the field of AM include a lack of global uniformity concerning the education of AM specialists, an increasing number of physicians practicing AM with diverse training backgrounds, the spread of AM being practiced outside of medical practice or hospital settings, and the influence of social media where the success is modelled and dictated by the identification of a youthful appearance). By the field of action enriched by technologies that aim not only at enhancement per se but also at the preservation and regeneration of tissues, it is necessary to establish an active multidisciplinary discussion on the definition of shared ethical limits. This discussion would allow AM to fully reclaim its identity as a specialty that aims to improve patient well-being whilst maintaining respect for patient aesthetic harmony, the expertise of specialists who practice AM, the essential role of safety, and awareness of the importance of a confidential doctor-patient relationship.

What Type of Person Should I Be? About the Appeal to Virtues in Public Health Interventions.

In line with how ethics has developed for the last three centuries, public health ethics has been widely dominated by a deontological as well as a utilitarian approach. The latter is a version of consequentialism, which states that maximizing utility is the primary goal of the majority of individuals or group action, while, on the other hand, virtue ethics, or at least the appeal to virtues, has been largely marginalized. The aim of this article is twofold. Firstly, we aim to highlight the political and ethical nature of public health interventions, often interpreted and presented as mere scientific enterprises. Secondly, we try to highlight the need to integrate or at least recognize the value of appeal to virtues in public health measures. The analysis will reference the Italian COVID-19 vaccination program as a case study. Initially, we will explore the political and ethical nature of any public health measure, using the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccination program in Italy as an example. Subsequently, we will illustrate the deontological approach to ethics, the utilitarian one, and the virtues one, focusing on the dynamic of the agent's perspective. Lastly, we will briefly analyze both the Italian COVID-19 vaccination program and the communication campaign that promoted it.

A return to humane medicine: Osler's legacy.

Sir William Osler is celebrated today not only for his contributions to the advancement of medical education, but also for the humanism he brought to the practice of medicine. He was a doctor whose bedside skills and manners were emulated, and can legitimately be called an infectious diseases specialist. Nonetheless, he was also a humanist in the broader sense of the term, a student of human affairs and human nature, who emphasised compassion for the individual. To what extent, if any, are today's challenges influenced by departures from the paradigms created by Osler? In this paper we sought to ascertain whether such a tradition is still relevant to current practice and may foster a new perspective. We analysed two features of Osler's legacy that may be useful to clinicians: the first is his vision of the patient-physician relationship; the second is his approach to humanities. William Osler saw medicine in its wider scope, with the right and duty to be concerned with the human condition as a whole. Indeed, his rounded concept of the medical profession as being engaged in helping and caring for the whole human being could help physicians build a more humanised medicine. Adopted in the age of evidence-based medicine, the Oslerian approach can enhance the relationship with patients and give physicians a role based on trust and authoritativeness rather than on authority.

[Case report: Iatrogenic shoulder pain syndrome following spinal accessory nerve injury during lateral cervical neck dissection for tongue cancer: the role of rehabilitation and ethical-deontological issues]. / Caso clinico di sindrome della spalla dolorosa post lesione iatrogena del nervo accessorio spinale in seguito a svuotamento latero-cervicale del collo per carcinoma della lingua: ruolo della riabilitazione e aspetti etico-deontologici.

The shoulder pain syndrome is the most frequent complication of lateral cervical neck dissection and may be caused by iatrogenic injury to the spinal accessory nerve, causing pain and functional limitation of the upper limb and of the cervical spine. Interdisciplinary collaboration and early rehabilitation can reduce the consequences of disability and the possible issues that can arise due to inadequate management of the problem.

Survey on advance care planning of Italian outpatients on chronic haemodialysis.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical practice guidelines published by the Renal Physicians Association (USA) recommend instituting advance care planning (ACP) for patients with end-stage renal disease. Studies on this issue are lacking in Italy. Our aim was to determine the attitudes of patients on ACP in our dialysis centre. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey. We recruited patients on maintenance haemodialysis (HD) at Hemodialysis Center of Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, from 1 March 2014 to 31 March 2015. The only exclusion criterion was inability to give an informed consent. Patients completed a questionnaire concerning their treatment preferences in three hypothetical disease scenarios: persistent vegetative state, advanced dementia, severe terminal illness; for each patients, we also collected clinical, functional and socioeconomic data. RESULTS: Thirty-four HD outpatients completed the study questionnaire. The majority of respondents (85%) considered information about prognosis, health conditions and treatment options, including withdrawing dialysis, as very important and 94% of respondents considered treatment of uraemic/dialytic symptoms the most important issue. In the health scenarios provided, dialysis was the treatment least withheld. Dependence on instrumental activities of daily living (0.048) and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (p=0.035) were associated with continuing dialysis in at least one scenario. CONCLUSIONS: ACP should be tailored to patients' value, culture and preferences. A significant proportion of patients, however, do not want to be involved in end of life decisions. Frail elderly patients, in particular, are not inclined to interrupt dialysis, despite poor quality of life or a poor prognosis.