Seven Ethical Issues Affecting Neurosurgeons in the Context of Health Care Reform.

Ethical discussions around health care reform typically focus on problems of social justice and health care equity. This review, in contrast, focuses on ethical issues of particular importance to neurosurgeons, especially with respect to potential changes in the physician-patient relationship that may occur in the context of health care reform.The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 (H.R. 3590) was not the first attempt at health care reform in the United States but it is the one currently in force. Its ambitions include universal access to health care, a focus on population health, payment reform, and cost control. Each of these aims is complicated by a number of ethical challenges, of which 7 stand out because of their potential influence on patient care: the accountability of physicians and surgeons to individual patients; the effects of financial incentives on clinical judgment; the definition and management of conflicting interests; the duty to preserve patient autonomy in the face of protocolized care; problems in information exchange and communication; issues related to electronic health records and data security; and the appropriate use of "Big Data."Systematic social and economic reforms inevitably raise ethical concerns. While the ACA may have driven these 7 to particular prominence, they are actually generic. Nevertheless, they are immediately relevant to the practice of neurosurgery and likely to reflect the realities the profession will be obliged to confront in the pursuit of more efficient and more effective health care.

The Ethical Imperative And Moral Challenges Of Engaging Patients And The Public With Evidence.

Engaging patients and the public with evidence is an ethical imperative because engagement is central to respect for persons and will likely improve health outcomes, facilitate the stewardship of resources, enhance prospects for justice, and build public trust. However, patient and public engagement is also morally complex, because evidence alone is never definitive. As patients and the public engage with evidence, value conflicts will arise and must be managed to achieve trustworthy decision making. We outline value conflicts likely to emerge in the following five settings: clinical care, health care organizations, public health, the regulatory context, and among payers. Using a variety of examples, we offer suggestions about how such conflicts may be managed, including providing more opportunities for democratic deliberation and having more explicit community discussion of how to balance personal choice and community well-being, transparent discussions of cost and quality outcomes, and greater patient engagement in community-based participatory research and the governance of learning health systems.

Ethical Practice Under Accountable Care.

Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are a key mechanism of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). ACOs will influence incentives for providers, who must understand these changes to make well-considered treatment decisions. Our paper defines an ethical framework for physician decisions and action within ACOs. Emerging ethical pressures providers will face as members of an ACO were classified under major headings representing three of the four principles of bioethics: autonomy, beneficence, and justice (no novel conflicts with non-maleficence were identified). Conflicts include a bias against transient populations, a motive to undertreat conditions lacking performance measures, and the mandate to improve population health incentivizing life intrusions. After introducing and explaining each conflict, recommendations are offered for how providers ought to precede in the face of novel ethical choices. Our description of novel ethical choices will help providers know what to expect and our recommendations can guide providers in choosing well.

Health Care Sharing Ministries and Their Exemption From the Individual Mandate of the Affordable Care Act.

The U.S. 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) exempts members of health care sharing ministries (HCSMs) from the individual mandate to have minimum essential insurance coverage. Little is generally known about these religious organizations and even less critical attention has been brought to bear on them and their ACA exemption. Both deserve close scrutiny due to the exemption's less than clear legislative justification, their potential influence on the ACA's policy and ethical success, and their salience to current religious liberty debates surrounding the expansion of religious exemptions from ACA responsibilities for both individuals and corporations. Analyzing documents of the United States' three largest health care sharing ministries and related material, I examine these organizations and their ACA exemption with particular consideration of their ethical dimensions. Here a thick description of the nature and workings of health care sharing ministries precedes a similar account of the ACA exemption. From these empirical analyses, five ethical and policy concerns emerge: (1) the charity versus insurance status of these ministries; (2) the conflation of two ACA religious exemptions; (3) the tension between the values of religious liberty and of justice; (4) the potential undermining of ACA policy goals; and (5) the questionable compliance of health care sharing ministries with ACA exemption requirements. An accurate and informed understanding of HCSMs is required for policymakers and others to justify the ACA exemption of health care sharing ministry members. A sufficient justification would address at least the five ethical and policy concerns raised here.

In name only? Mental health parity or illusory reform.

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 and the Affordable Care Act mandate significant insurance and patient protection reforms. Despite these safeguards, lax regulatory enforcement and lack of consumer and provider sophistication have failed to remedy ongoing insurer abuses resulting in deprivation of crucial mental health and substance abuse treatment. Even with persistent and informed advocacy, including strategies outlined herein, any potential parity gains are negated by unreasonably low reimbursement benchmarks already used by insurers in many ACA (∗) -exchange plans. The need for legislative remediation is therefore urgent.

The Affordable Care Act: the ethical call to transform the organizational culture.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will require health care leaders and managers to develop strategies and implement organizational tactics for their organization to survive and thrive under the federal mandates of this new health care law. Successful health care organizations and health care systems will be defined by their adaptability in the new value-based marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act. The most critical underlining challenge for this success will be the effective transformation of the organizational culture. Transformational value-based leadership is now needed to answer the ethical call for transforming the organizational culture. This article provides a model and recommendations to influence change in the most difficult leadership duty-transforming the organizational culture.

Phase changes in the BRCA policy domain.

The recent US Supreme Court ruling against gene patenting has been accompanied by the passage at the federal level of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, both events representing a thawing or phase change in policies that will now make preventive techniques, such as BRCA genetic testing to predict risk for familial breast and ovarian cancer, more affordable and accessible. Authors including Yun-Han Huang in this journal have noted the judicial ruling is one step--a significant one--in the process of patent system reform. This commentary links such changes with policy formation and action taken by members of diverse religious communities in the aftermath of the Human Genome Project and continuing in today's genome sequencing area. Religious engagement has acted as a catalyzing force for change in the creation and dissemination of genetic developments. Religious perspectives are needed to solve the new ethical dilemmas posed by population screening for BRCA mutations and the rise of direct-to-consumer and provider marketing of such genetic tests, which have far-reaching consequences at the individual, family, and societal levels.

The potential conflict between policy and ethics in caring for undocumented immigrants at academic health centers.

Academic health centers (AHCs) are at the forefront of delivering care to the diverse medically underserved and uninsured populations in the United States, as well as training the majority of the health care workforce, who are professionally obligated to serve all patients regardless of race or immigration status. Despite AHCs' central leadership role in these endeavors, few consolidated efforts have emerged to resolve potential conflicts between national, state, and local policies that exclude certain classifications of immigrants from receiving federal public assistance and health professionals' social missions and ethical oath to serve humanity. For instance, whereas the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act provides a pathway to insurance coverage for more than 30 million Americans, undocumented immigrants and legally documented immigrants residing in the United States for less than five years are ineligible for Medicaid and excluded from purchasing any type of coverage through state exchanges. To inform this debate, the authors describe their experience at the University of New Mexico Hospital (UNMH) and discuss how the UNMH has responded to this challenge and overcome barriers. They offer three recommendations for aligning AHCs' social missions and professional ethics with organizational policies: (1) that AHCs determine eligibility for financial assistance based on residency rather than citizenship, (2) that models of medical education and health professions training provide students with service-learning opportunities and applied community experience, and (3) that frontline staff and health care professionals receive standardized training on eligibility policies to minimize discrimination towards immigrant patients.

Academic health centers and care of undocumented immigrants in the United States: servant leaders or uncourageous followers?

Public dialogue and debate about the health care overhaul in the United States is centered on one contentious question: Is there a moral obligation to ensure that all people (including undocumented immigrants) within its borders have access to affordable health care? For academic health centers (AHCs), which often provide safety-net care to the uninsured, this question has moral and social implications. An estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States (80% of whom are Latino) are uninsured and currently prohibited from purchasing exchange coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, even at full cost. The authors attempt to dispel the many misconceptions and distorted assumptions surrounding the use of health services by this vulnerable population. The authors also suggest that AHCs need to recalibrate their mission to focus on social accountability as well as the ethical and humanistic practice of medicine for all people, recognizing the significance of inclusion over exclusion in making progress on population health and health care. AHCs play a crucial role, both in educational policy and as a safety-net provider, in reducing health disparities that negatively impact vulnerable populations. Better health for all is possible through better alignment, collaboration, and partnering with other AHCs and safety-net providers. Through servant leadership, AHCs can be the leaders that this change imperative demands.

The Affordable Care Act: the ethical call for value-based leadership to transform quality.

Hospitals in America face a daunting and historical challenge starting in 2013 as leadership navigates their organizations toward a new port of call-the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was signed into law in March 2010 and held in abeyance waiting on 2 pivotal points-the Supreme Court's June 2012 ruling upholding the constitutionality of the ACA and the 2012 presidential election of Barack Obama bringing to reality to health care organizations that leadership now must implement the mandates of health care delivery under the ACA. This article addresses the need for value-based leadership to transform the culture of health care organizations in order to be successful in navigating uncharted waters under the unprecedented challenges for change in the delivery of quality health care.