RESUMO
In the perioperative period, several potential conflicts between anaesthetists/intensive care specialists and surgeons may exist. They are detrimental to the quality of patient care and to the well-being of the teams. They are a source of medical errors and contribute to burn-out. Patients can become the victims of such conflicts, which deserve ethical reflection. Their resolution through analysis and shared solutions is necessary. This article seeks to analyse these conflicts, taking into account their specificities and constraints. In order to understand this context, it is important to consider the specificities of each group involved and the records of such situations. Several factors can prevent these conflicts, first and foremost the patients themselves and the quality of the care that is provided. Medical deontology aims mainly at preventing and resolving these conflicts. Generally speaking, the quality approach which is increasingly applied in health care institutions (involving declarations of adverse events, morbidity/mortality reviews, benchmarking, analysis and improvement of practices, etc.) also contributes to the prevention and resolution of disagreements. The teaching of communication techniques that begins with the initial training, the evaluation of team behaviours (through simulation training for example), the respect of others' constraints, particularly when it comes to learning, as well as transparency regarding conflicts of interests, are all additional elements of conflict prevention. Lastly, conflicts may at times be caused by deviant behaviours, which must be met with a clear and uncompromising collective and institutional approach. This article concludes by offering a standardised approach for conflict resolution.
Assuntos
Anestesiologia , Relações Interpessoais , Período Perioperatório/ética , Médicos , Cirurgiões , Anestesiologia/ética , Dissidências e Disputas , Humanos , Médicos/ética , Cirurgiões/éticaRESUMO
CONTEXT: Management of the end of life is a major social issue which was addressed in France by law, on April 22nd 2005. Nevertheless, a debate has emerged within French society about the legalization of euthanasia and/or assisted suicide (E/AS). This issue raises questions for doctors and most especially for anesthetists and intensive care physicians. OBJECTIVE: To highlight, dispassionately and without dogmatism, key points taken from the published literature and the experience of countries which have legislated for E/AS. RESULTS: The current French law addresses most of the end of life issues an intensive care physician might encounter. It is credited for imposing palliative care when therapies have become senseless and are withdrawn. However, this requirement for palliative care is generally applied too late in the course of a fatal illness. There is a great need for more education and stronger incentives for early action in this area. On the rare occasions when E/AS is requested, either by the patient or their loved-ones, it often results from a failure to consider that treatments have become senseless and conflict with patient's best interest. The implementation of E/AS cannot be reduced to a simple affirmation of the Principle of autonomy. Such procedures present genuine difficulties and the risk of drift. CONCLUSION: We deliver a message of prudence and caution. Should we address painful end of life and moral suffering issues, by suppressing the subject, i.e. ending the patient's life, when comprehensive palliative care has not first been fully granted to all patients in need of it ?