Undergraduate Ethics Education in Paramedicine in Australia.

In Australia, paramedics are obliged to practice ethically. Graduates of baccalaureate degrees in paramedicine should therefore possess a common grounding in ethics to meet the professional capabilities expected of registered paramedics. However, there is a lack of clarity regarding ethics education for paramedicine students, including what is taught, how it is taught, and how it is assessed. This paper explores ethics education for paramedicine students in Australia, how it aligns with current professional expectations, and how it may be enhanced. Point-in-time data regarding ethics education was collected from websites of fifteen Australian universities offering undergraduate baccalaureate degrees in paramedicine. Data collection was supported by consultation with academics from several institutions. Content analysis was utilised to categorise and analyse data to explore similarities and differences in curricula. Similarities included approaches to learning and teaching and the use of case-based learning, with variability found across teaching staff profiles and content areas. Findings suggest it is time for collaboration to develop a model ethics curriculum for paramedicine students in Australia.

Providing emergency medical care without consent: How the 'emergency principle' in Australian law protects against claims of trespass.

In a medical emergency, the usual requirement to obtain consent before giving treatment does not apply. This exception to the general rule on consent to medical treatment is known as the 'emergency principle'. By considering a case scenario, and by adjusting the facts to this scenario, we explain the circumstances in which the emergency principle will protect practitioners from an action in trespass. Although the fundamentals of this principle are uncontroversial, there are a number of uncertainties and inconsistencies in this law in relation to certain parameters. For example, whether a practitioner would ever be obliged to seek consent from a substitute decision-maker before providing emergency treatment is not clearly or consistently explained. We suggest the law should be clarified.

Community attitudes to emergency research without prospective informed consent: A survey of the general population.

OBJECTIVE: To give voice to the general public's views of prospective and retrospective (deferred) consent in the emergency research setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional, stratified population-based, telephone survey was conducted in April to July 2016. A questionnaire consisting of standardised health and demographic details, and seven specifically designed, and pilot-tested questions, five closed and two open text, based on literature review and previous surveys in the field was used. Quantitative and qualitative techniques were used in the data analysis. This was a centrally coordinated national telephone survey in Australia, the 2016 National Social Survey, coordinated by Central Queensland University. Data for 1217 adult (18+ years) participants were included in the analysis, with a response rate of 26%. The sample demographics were broadly representative of the Australian population. RESULTS: The majority of respondents were supportive of research in emergency circumstances without prospective informed consent. However, the type of research and level of risk influence its acceptability. Common themes in qualitative analysis included the critical or life-threatening nature of the illness being researched, and the potential harms and benefits of participation. CONCLUSIONS: This research provided the first opportunity for the community to contribute to discourse about prospective and retrospective (deferred) consent in the emergency research setting in Australia. Further work is needed to determine community expectations of how this process can be optimised and implemented, and to identify potential situations where this may not be acceptable.

Toward a systematic approach to assessment and care planning in palliative care: A practical review of clinical tools.

OBJECTIVE: Ensuring a consistent and systematic approach to the delivery of care for people with advanced disease is a priority for palliative care services worldwide. Many clinical tools are available to aid in this process; however, they are often used sporadically, and implementation of a routine set of clinical tools to guide care planning in the specialist palliative care sector in Australia has not been achieved. This study sought to recommend key clinical tools that may assist with the assessment and care planning of specialist palliative care provision for patients and family caregivers admitted to specialist palliative care settings (home, hospital, and hospice). METHOD: A mixed-methods sequential approach over four phases was employed, involving: (1) a palliative care sector survey, (2) a systematic literature review, (3) an appraisal of identified clinical tools, and (4) a focus group with an expert panel who critiqued and endorsed a final suite of clinical tools recommended for specialist palliative care. RESULTS: Twelve tools with practical relevance were recommended for use across settings of care. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Palliative services should review current practices and seek to implement this recommended suite of tools to enhance assessment and guide care delivery across care settings. Subsequent evaluation should also occur.

School-based youth health nurses and adolescent decision-making concerning reproductive and sexual health advice: How can the law guide healthcare practitioners in this context?

Abstract School-Based Youth Health Nurses (SBYHNs) work in Queensland high schools, providing sexual and reproductive health care/advice (amongst other things) to adolescents. SBYHNs are often responsible for referring high school students to other health care practitioners or external health services/community agencies. One of the difficulties faced in this context is how to assess the issue of capacity in terms of the adolescent's ability to provide consent to his or her own health care without parental involvement. This is important because it enables SBYHNs to maintain confidentiality with adolescents, which encourages adolescents to obtain sexual health advice. In this paper we outline the key legal principles relevant to nurses working in this field. We provide some practical examples of issues faced by SBYHNs and consider how the issue of Gillick competency is relevant to these examples. We demonstrate that the law seeks to prioritise the concept of confidentiality and aims to avoid exposing adolescents to harm that may result from unsafe sexual practices. Importantly, the issues discussed in this paper are relevant to nurses working within this field in all Australian jurisdictions.

School-Based Youth Health Nurses and Adolescent Decision-Making Concerning Reproductive and Sexual Health Advice: How Can the Law Guide Healthcare Practitioners in this Context?

Abstract School-Based Youth Health Nurses (SBYHNs) work in Queensland high schools, providing sexual and reproductive health care/advice (amongst other things) to adolescents. SBYHNs are often responsible for referring high school students to other health care practitioners or external health services/community agencies. One of the difficulties faced in this context is how to assess the issue of capacity in terms of the adolescent's ability to provide consent to his or her own health care without parental involvement. This is important because it enables SBYHNs to maintain confidentiality with adolescents, which encourages adolescents to obtain sexual health advice. In this paper we outline the key legal principles relevant to nurses working in this field. We provide some practical examples of issues faced by SBYHNs and consider how the issue of Gillick competency is relevant to these examples. We demonstrate that the law seeks to prioritise the concept of confidentiality and aims to avoid exposing adolescents to harm that may result from unsafe sexual practices. Importantly, the issues discussed in this paper are relevant to nurses working within this field in all Australian jurisdictions.

Double standards in special medical research: questioning the discrepancy between requirements for medical research involving incompetent adults and medical research involving children.

Medical research represents a substantial departure from conventional medical care. Medical care is patient-orientated, with decisions based on the best interests and/or wishes of the person receiving the care. In contrast, medical research is future-directed. Primarily it aims to contribute new knowledge about illness or disease, or new knowledge about interventions, such as drugs, that impact upon some human condition. Current State and Territory laws and research ethics guidelines in Australia relating to the review of medical research appropriately acknowledge that the functions of medical care and medical research differ. Prior to a medical research project commencing, the study must be reviewed and approved by a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). For medical research involving incompetent adults, some jurisdictions require an additional, independent safeguard by way of tribunal or court approval of medical research protocols. This extra review process reflects the uncertainty of medical research involvement, and the difficulties surrogate decision-makers of incompetent adults face in making decisions about others, and deliberating about the risks and benefits of research involvement. Parents of children also face the same difficulties when making decisions about their child's research involvement. However, unlike the position concerning incompetent adults, there are no similar safeguards under Australian law in relation to the approval of medical research involving children. This column questions why this discrepancy exists with a view to generating further dialogue on the topic.

Understanding how cancer patients actualise, relinquish, and reject advance care planning: implications for practice.

PURPOSE: Although advance care planning (ACP) is recognised as integral to quality cancer care, it remains poorly integrated in many settings. Given cancer patients' unpredictable disease trajectories and equivocal treatment options, a disease-specific ACP model may be necessary. This study examines how Australian cancer patients consider ACP. Responses will inform the development of an Australian Cancer Centre's ACP programme. METHODS: A constructivist research approach with grounded theory design was applied. Eighteen adults from lung and gastro-intestinal tumour streams participated. Participants first described their initial understanding of ACP, received ACP information, and finally completed a semi-structured interview assisted by the vignette technique. Qualitative inter-rater reliability was integrated. RESULTS: Participants initially had scant knowledge of ACP. On obtaining further information, their responses indicated that: For cancer patients, ACP is an individualised, dynamic, and shared process characterised by myriad variations in choices to actualise, relinquish, and/or reject its individual components (medical enduring power of attorney, statement of choices, refusal of treatment certificate, and advanced directive). Actualisation of each component involves considering, possibly conversing about, planning, and communicating a decision, usually iteratively. Reactions can change over time and are informed by values, memories, personalities, health perceptions, appreciation of prognoses, and trust or doubts in their substitute decision makers. CONCLUSION: Findings endorse the value of routinely, though sensitively, discussing ACP with cancer patients at various time points across their disease trajectory. Nonetheless, ACP may also be relinquished or rejected and ongoing offers for ACP in some patients may be offensive to their value system.