ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In France, advance directives (AD) remain unknown and underused by healthcare users and professionals. This is particularly true in oncology. This work was carried out with patients and caregivers of a Comprehensive Cancer Center to improve their appropriation and information. METHODS: The project, built by the Ethics Committee, the Patients Committee and the Palliative Care Team, made it possible to develop over 6 months a training program, an information procedure and several original documents. RESULTS: A total of 34 one-hour training courses for all professionals were organized. A procedure for making information available, including the right to draft ADs, has been implemented. This procedure is personalized, gradual and multi-professional. When a patient wishes to write his AD, he is accompanied by a dedicated team and benefits from a specific form, which enlighten values and preferences before addressing the desired level of therapeutic commitment. Communication elements were diffused, and a specific training on "anticipated discussions" was created. A dedicated space in the computerized chart makes it possible to locate the existence of ADs and to display them instantaneously. DISCUSSION - CONCLUSION: Based on the observation of the obstacles to the use of ADs, the strategy we implemented aims to provide information that is both efficient and ethically respectful for both patients and caregivers. ADs are only one element facilitating autonomy and anticipation, and must be associated with a shared continuous definition of the project and of the goals of care.
Subject(s)
Advance Directives , Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Ethics Committees , France , Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has aggressively reached the most vulnerable, not only the elderly but also patients with chronic conditions such as cancer. In this study, we present the outlines of ethical thinking and the measures implemented to try to respect our basic values of care, in the specific environment of an oncology hospital. METHODS: Our ethics committee created an ethical watch system based on 24/7 shifts to assist practitioners in their daily decisions. We discuss the challenges faced by patients with cancer during the pandemic, such as access to critical care and ethical dilemmas in the context of resource scarcity, as well as the issue of isolation of patients. We also debate the restrictions in access to oncology care in a health context strongly 'prioritised' against COVID-19. RESULTS: In all areas of an ethical dilemma, either for sorting out access to critical care or for the dramatic consequences of prolonged isolation of patients, our common thread was our attempt to protect, whenever possible, the principles of deontological ethics by strictly resisting utilitarian pressure. Respecting democratic health decision-making processes is a cornerstone of ethically relevant decisions, including in the context of a sanitary crisis. CONCLUSION: The role of an ethics committee related to real-life situations includes not only a reflexive perspective in respect of fundamental principles, but also the help to enlighten and resolve ethical dilemmas in complex clinical situations. This ethical watch team assists physicians in decision-making, promoting the supportive and palliative dimension of care with a holistic approach.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , Aged , Pandemics , Neoplasms/therapy , Medical Oncology , Palliative CareABSTRACT
The Ethics committee of Gustave Roussy cancer center is devoted to both reflection and action. The group has 40 members, professionals, patients and outside experts. These meet in plenary meetings or in specific working sessions and intervene at the request of any professional faced with ethical questions in the care. This Ethics Committee has voluntarily a double vocation: on one hand, a reflective group on major issues of ethics in health and its involvement in hospital life; on the other hand, a working group embedded in the daily lives of the care. The themes addressed at the meetings (plenary sessions, annual meetings) include shared-decision making, advance directives, refusal of care, religious aspects, or biomedical research Daily activity centered on the care revolves around several times a week meetings, in various services, "Supportive Collegial Meetings" such as proposed in the 3rd French Cancer Plan; these include nursing staff members, oncologists, intensive and palliative care specialists, psychologist, around difficult medical and/or ethical situations. In case of situation requiring an urgent discussion, a referral to the Ethics Committee brings together within 24hours four to five members of the Committee and the care team. Moreover, the Ethics Committee helped develop Aid to Decision making Form upon care gradation for hospitalized cancer patients. Through these interventions on a daily basis, assistance of professionals, reflexive vocation or even delivery of training, the Ethics Committee contributes to an acculturation around anticipation and collegiality in the care. Its double polarity aims to reconcile "philosophical time' for the ethics process, and the connection with the routine issues raised by patients, their families and caregivers.
Subject(s)
Cancer Care Facilities/ethics , Ethics Committees , Bioethical Issues , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Clinical Decision-Making/ethics , Congresses as Topic/organization & administration , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , France , HumansABSTRACT
Caregivers can find themselves faced with a refusal of nursing care. A number of questions are then raised. While it is firstly important to understand the reasons for this refusal and what is at stake for the patient, there are a number of nursing strategies in place, not least of all dialogue and analysis. The role of the multi-disciplinary team is essential in such situations.
