Clinical Ethics Consultation During the First COVID-19 Pandemic Surge at an Academic Medical Center: A Mixed Methods Analysis.

While a significant literature has appeared discussing theoretical ethical concerns regarding COVID-19, particularly regarding resource prioritization, as well as a number of personal reflections on providing patient care during the early stages of the pandemic, systematic analysis of the actual ethical issues involving patient care during this time is limited. This single-center retrospective cohort mixed methods study of ethics consultations during the first surge of the COVID 19 pandemic in Massachusetts between March 15, 2020 through June 15, 2020 aim to fill this gap. Results indicate that there was no significant difference in the median number of monthly consultation cases during the first COVID-19 surge compared to the same period the year prior and that the characteristics of the ethics consults during the COVID-19 surge and same period the year prior were also similar. Through inductive analysis, we identified four themes related to ethics consults during the first COVID-19 surge including (1) prognostic difficulty for COVID-19 positive patients, (2) challenges related to visitor restrictions, (3) end of life scenarios, and (4) family members who were also positive for COVID-19. Cases were complex and often aligned with multiple themes. These patient case-related sources of ethical issues were managed against the backdrop of intense systemic ethical issues and a near lockdown of daily life. Healthcare ethics consultants can learn from this experience to enhance training to be ready for future disasters.

Experience with a Revised Hospital Policy on Not Offering Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Critical care society guidelines recommend that ethics committees mediate intractable conflict over potentially inappropriate treatment, including Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. There are, however, limited data on cases and circumstances in which ethics consultants recommend not offering cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) despite patient or surrogate requests and whether physicians follow these recommendations. This was a retrospective cohort of all adult patients at a large academic medical center for whom an ethics consult was requested for disagreement over DNR status. Patient demographic predictors of ethics consult outcomes were analyzed. In 42 of the 116 cases (36.2%), the patient or surrogate agreed to the clinician recommended DNR order following ethics consultation. In 72 of 74 (97.3%) of the remaining cases, ethics consultants recommended not offering CPR. Physicians went on to write a DNR order without patient/surrogate consent in 57 (79.2%) of those cases. There were no significant differences in age, race/ethnicity, country of origin, or functional status between patients where a DNR order was and was not placed without consent. Physicians were more likely to place a DNR order for patients believed to be imminently dying (p = 0.007). The median time from DNR order to death was 4 days with a 90-day mortality of 88.2%. In this single-center cohort study, there was no evidence that patient demographic factors affected ethics consultants' recommendation to withhold CPR despite patient/surrogate requests. Physicians were most likely to place a DNR order without consent for imminently dying patients.

Ethics Consultation for Adult Solid Organ Transplantation Candidates and Recipients: A Single Centre Experience.

Systematic study of the intersection of ethics consultation services and solid organ transplants and recipients can identify and illustrate ethical issues that arise in the clinical care of these patients, including challenges beyond resource allocation. This was a single-centre, retrospective cohort study of all adult ethics consultations between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, at a large academic medical centre in the north-eastern United States. Of the 880 ethics consultations, sixty (6.8 per cent ) involved solid organ transplant, thirty-nine (65.0 per cent) for candidates and twenty-one (35.0 per cent ) for recipients. Ethics consultations were requested for 4.3 per cent of heart, 4.9 per cent of lung, 0.3 per cent of liver, and 0.3 per cent of kidney transplant recipients over the study period. Nurses were more likely to request ethics consultations for recipients than physicians (80.0 per cent vs 20.0 per cent , p = 0.006). The most common reason for consultation among transplant candidates was discussion about intensity of treatment or goals of care after the patient was not or was no longer a transplant candidate. The most common reason for ethics consultation among transplant recipients was disagreement between transplant providers and patients/families/non-transplant healthcare professionals over the appropriate intensity of treatment for recipients. Very few consultations involved questions about appropriate resource allocation. Ethics consultants involved in these cases most often navigated communication challenges between transplant and non-transplant healthcare professionals and patients and families.

Ethics Consultations Related to Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic has resulted in an increased number of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) hospitalized for serious medical conditions. The intersection between hospital ethics consultations and the opioid crisis has not received significant attention. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize ethics consult questions among inpatients with OUD at our institution, Massachusetts General Hospital. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of ethics consultations from January 1, 1993 to December 31, 2017 at Massachusetts General Hospital. RESULTS: Between 1993 and 2017, OUD played a central role in ethics consultations in 43 of 1061 (4.0%) cases. There was an increase in these requests beginning in 2009, rising from 1.4% to 6.8% of consults by 2017. Compared with other ethics cases, individuals with OUD were significantly younger (P < 0.001), more likely to be uninsured or underinsured (P < 0.001), and more likely to have a comorbid mental health diagnosis (P = 0.001). The most common reason for consultation involved continuation of life-sustaining treatment in the setting of overdose with neurological injury or severe infection. Additional reasons included discharge planning, challenges with pain management and behavior, and the appropriateness of surgical intervention, such as repeat valve replacement or organ transplant. Health care professionals struggled with their ethical obligations to patients with OUD, including when to treat pain with narcotics and how to provide longitudinal care for patients with limited resources outside of the hospital. CONCLUSION: The growing opioid epidemic corresponds with a rise in ethics consultations for patients with OUD. Similar factors associated with OUD itself, including comorbid mental health diagnoses and concerns about relapse, contributed to the ethical complexities of these consults.