RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ethical climate refers to the shared perception of ethical norms and sets the scope for what is ethical and acceptable behaviour within teams. AIM: This paper sought to explore perceptions of ethical climate amongst healthcare workers as measured by the Ethical Climate Questionnaire (ECQ), the Hospital Ethical Climate Survey (HECS) and the Ethics Environment Questionnaire (EEQ). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was utilised. PSYCINFO, CINAHL, WEB OF SCIENCE, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched, and papers were included if they sampled healthcare workers and used the ECQ, HECS or EEQ. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION: Ethical approval was not required. RESULTS: The search returned 1020 results. After screening, 61 papers were included (n = 43 HECS, n = 15 ECQ, n = 3 EEQ). The overall sample size was over 17,000. The pooled mean score for the HECS was 3.60. Mean scores of individual studies ranged from 2.97 to 4.5. For the HECS studies, meta-regression was carried out. No relationship was found between the country of the studies, the study setting (ICU v non-ICU settings) or the mean years of experience that the sample had. For the ECQ, sub-scales had mean scores ranging from 3.41 (instrumental) to 4.34 (law) and were all observed to have significant and substantial heterogeneity. Three studies utilised the EEQ so further analysis was not carried out. CONCLUSIONS: The above results provide insight into the variability of scores as measured by the HECS, ECQ and EEQ. To some extent, this variability is not surprising with studies carried out across 21 countries and in a range of healthcare systems. Results also suggest that it may be that more local and context specific factors are more important when it comes to predicting ethical climate.
RESUMO
The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic has been widely documented. While deaths are now in the millions and many more have been impacted in other ways, the impact of Covid-19 has not been felt equally, with it exacerbating existing inequalities and disproportionately impacting a number of populations. With this Covid-19 has created unprecedented challenges in relation to health communication, with the need to reach disadvantaged populations. This systematic scoping review sought to 1) synthesize the existing research regarding communication inequalities in the response to the Covid-19 pandemic, and 2) analyze the recommendations that emerge from this body of evidence on how to best address these inequalities. This review includes 40 studies that fell into three broad groups (1) those revealing a disadvantage or inequality in studies of general population; (2) those focussing on communication with sub-groups disproportionately affected by the pandemic; and (3) those reporting and evaluating practical attempts to address inequalities. The results largely corroborate those found in past pandemics, highlighting the role of sociodemographic, cultural/religious, and economic factors in facilitating/jeopardizing the public's capacity to access and act upon public health messaging. In a number of studies it was encouraging to see recommendations from the literature - particularly, lessons learnt on the importance of community partnerships, trusted messengers and the co-creation of health and risk messages - being applied, however many challenges remain unmet. Covid-19 has also highlighted the need to actively tackle misinformation, something which was recognized, but largely unaddressed.
