COVID-19 and beyond: the ethical challenges of resetting health services during and after public health emergencies

Delivering compassionate NHS healthcare: A qualitative study exploring the ethical implications of resetting NHS maternity and paediatric services following the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

A distinction can be drawn between healthcare, where compassion is evident, and the functional delivery of health services. Measures to curb the spread of COVID-19, such as personal protective equipment, telehealth, and visiting restrictions created barriers to service delivery and put pressure on healthcare. Through 37 qualitative interviews with NHS senior managers (n = 11), health professionals (n = 26), and 5 focus group discussions with members of the public (n = 26), we explored experiences of the everyday ethical tensions created as services were being re-established following the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in England. Our analysis enriches an understanding of compassionate care as outlined in NHS operational documents - covering the emotional, moral, and relational components of healthcare beyond the functionalities of treatment. From this analysis, we consider the normative standards underpinning NHS healthcare, concluding that, wherever possible, offering compassionate healthcare to patients and their families should be facilitated, and health professionals should themselves be compassionately supported in the workplace. Our findings foreground the need to consider the consequences of the short-term adoption of a functional treatment approach, including strategies that support health professionals and inform the public, to avoid the long-term damage caused by the fracturing of compassionate healthcare.

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.

A proposal for formal fairness requirements in triage emergency departments: publicity, accessibility, relevance, standardisability and accountability

This paper puts forward a wish list of requirements for formal fairness in the specific context of triage in emergency departments (EDs) and maps the empirical and conceptual research questions that need to be addressed in this context in the near future. The pandemic has brought to the fore the necessity for public debate about how to allocate resources fairly in a situation of great shortage. However, issues of fairness arise also outside of pandemics: decisions about how to allocate resources are structurally unavoidable in healthcare systems, as value judgements underlie every allocative decision, although they are not always easily identifiable. In this paper, we set out to bridge this gap in the context of EDs. In the first part, we propose five formal requirements specifically applied for ED triage to be considered fair and legitimate: publicity, accessibility, relevance, standardisability and accountability. In the second part of the paper, we map the conceptual and empirical ethics questions that will need to be investigated to assess whether healthcare systems guarantee a formally just ED triage. In conclusion, we argue that there is a vast research landscape in need of an in-depth conceptual and empirical investigation in the context of ED triage in ordinary times. Addressing both types of questions in this context is vital for promoting a fair and legitimate ED triage and for fostering reflection on formal fairness allocative issues beyond triage.

Participatory Approach to Develop Evidence-Based Clinical Ethics Guidelines for the Care of COVID-19 Patients: A Mixed Method Study From Nepal

During health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers face numerous ethical challenges while catering to the needs of patients in healthcare settings. Although the data recapitulating high-income countries ethics frameworks are available, the challenges faced by clinicians in resource-limited settings of low- and middle-income countries are not discussed widely due to a lack of baseline data or evidence. The Nepali healthcare system, which is chronically understaffed and underequipped, was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in its capacity to manage health services and resources for needy patients, leading to ethical dilemmas and challenges during clinical practice. This study aimed to develop a standard guideline that would address syndemic ethical dilemmas during clinical care of COVID-19 patients who are unable to afford standard-of-care. A mixed method study was conducted between February and June of 2021 in 12 government designated COVID-19 treatment hospitals in central Nepal. The draft guideline was discussed among the key stakeholders in the pandemic response in Nepal. The major ethical dilemmas confronted by the study participants (50 healthcare professionals providing patient care at COVID-19 treatment hospitals) could be grouped into five major pillars of ethical clinical practice: rational allocation of medical resources, updated treatment protocols that guide clinical decisions, standard-of-care regardless of patient's economic status, effective communication among stakeholders for prompt patient care, and external factors such as political and bureaucratic interference affecting ethical practice. This living clinical ethics guideline, which has been developed based on the local evidence and case stories of frontline responders, is expected to inform the policymakers as well as the decision-makers positioned at the concerned government units. These ethics guidelines could be endorsed with revisions by the concerned regulatory authorities for the use during consequent waves of COVID-19 and other epidemics that may occur in the future. Other countries affected by the pandemic could conduct similar studies to explore ethical practices in the local clinical and public health context.

Evaluation of physician–patient relationship and bioethical principles in COVID-19 patients

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted medical care in many ways; previously, a patient would enter a hospital and had an approximate idea of what would happen upon his admission, the physician informed them about it, but in the last two years this scenario has changed. Therefore, our aim was to identify if bioethical principles are present in the physician–patient relationship and the effect of these in the health care provided, through an observational and descriptive study where patients answered the validated ReMePaB questionnaire that measures the presence of bioethical principles in the physician–patient relationship, on the seventh day of their hospital stay and 24 h after discharge, during the period from 1 August to 5 November 2020. In autonomy, an improvement in the score was observed in the second application compared to the first measurement; in the principle of non-vulnerability, the same scenario was observed for the first and second measurements, respectively. In the principles of beneficence, dignity, and justice, no statistically significant differences were observed. Considering the presence or absence of bioethical aspects in health care in this pandemic creates an area of opportunity to know the feelings of the patient during the care received and to maintain what is done well and improve those aspects that can be improved.

Management of Gynecologic Cancer During COVID-19 Pandemic: South Asian Perspective

Management of gynecological cancers has suffered during the pandemic, partly due to lockdown and partly due to directing resources to manage COVID-19 patients. Modification of gynecological cancer management during this pandemic is recommended. Cervical cancer patients who present with stage IA1 disease can have a delay of up to 8 weeks for surgical treatment, considering the slow tumor growth rate. Women with stages IA2, IB1, IB2, IIA1 must undergo radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy within 6 to 8 weeks. In areas where surgical treatment is not available, patients should be referred for radiation therapy/areas with adequate surgical expertise. The surgical option is attractive for early cancers during the COVID era, as it involves a single visit compared to the multiple visits required for chemoradiation. The value of lymph node staging needs to be reconsidered. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be given preference over primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancers. Surgeries, which demand extended surgical time such as Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and pelvic exenterations, should be avoided during this pandemic. For patients scheduled for interval surgery after two or three neoadjuvant cycles, six cycles of chemotherapy should be considered before surgery is performed. For early-stage, low-grade endometrial cancer, consideration should be given to medical management until surgery is possible. The above recommendations have been made keeping in mind the geography, patient load, and availability of resources available to health care providers from southeast Asia. They might not be applicable globally and every practitioner should take call regarding patient's management as per availability of resources and loco-regional circumstances. The implementation of recommended international guidelines for the management of gynecologic cancers should take precedence. Each modification to the standard approach should be approved by a multidisciplinary team depending on the condition of the patients and the locoregional circumstances.

The Enigmatic COVID-19 Vulnerabilities and the Invaluable Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The objective of the study is to conduct an exploratory review of the Covid-19 pandemic by focusing on the theme of Covid-19 pandemic morbidity and mortality, considering the dynamics of artificial intelligence and quality of life (QOL). The methods used in this research paper include a review of literature, anecdotal evidence, and reports on the morbidity of COVID-19, including the scope of its devastating effects in different countries such as the US, Africa, UK, China, and Brazil, among others. The findings of this study suggested that the devastating effects of the coronavirus are felt across different vulnerable populations. These include the elderly, front-line workers, marginalized communities, visible minorities, and more. The challenge in Africa is especially daunting because of inadequate infrastructure, and financial and human resources, among others. Besides, AI technology is being successfully used by scientists to enhance the development process of vaccines and drugs. However, its usage in other stages of the pandemic has not been adequately explored. Ultimately, it has been concluded that the effects of the Covid-19 are producing unprecedented and catastrophic outcomes in many countries. With a few exceptions, the common and current intervention approach is driven by many factors, including the compilation of relevant reliable and compelling data sets. On a positive note, the compelling trailblazing and catalytic contributions of AI towards the rapid discovery of COVID-19 vaccines are a good indication of future technological innovations and their effectiveness.

Factors influencing initiation of health behaviour conversations with patients: Cross-sectional study of nurses, midwives, and healthcare support workers in Wales

Aim

To identify factors influencing healthcare professionals’ engagement in health behaviour conversations with patients.

Design

Cross‐sectional survey.

Methods

Between April and June 2019, an online survey of 1338 nurses, midwives and healthcare support workers was conducted. The survey assessed whether staff felt comfortable initiating health behaviour conversations with patients about five behaviours (reducing alcohol intake; stop smoking; being more active; reducing their weight; and improving their diet) and barriers to conversation initiation. Health professionals’ own health‐related behaviours, self‐rated health and mental wellbeing, and socio‐demographic characteristics were recorded. Logistic regression models were built to assess factors associated with feeling comfortable initiating health behaviour conversations for each topic.

Result

Less than 50% of respondents reported feeling comfortable initiating health behaviour conversations with patients. Female staff, young professionals (18 to 29 years), those in lower staff grades and those with poorer health and low mental wellbeing were less likely to report feeling comfortable having health behaviour conversations across all topics. Those who did not adhere to physical activity and dietary guidelines were less likely to initiate a conversation about being more active and having a healthy diet, respectively. Not having time to discuss the topic, suitable space to hold a conversation, and feeling worried about offending/upsetting patients were the main barriers reported.

Conclusion

Around 6 in 10 members of the nursing, midwifery and healthcare support workforce in Wales potentially do not feel comfortable to initiate a health behaviour conversation with patients about health and wellbeing. Feeling less comfortable to initiate a conversation was associated with staff demographics and organizational factors.

Impact

We identified those less likely to initiate health behaviour conversations as well as personal and organizational barriers to initiation. This will help to target and tailor interventions to ensure staff are equipped and enabled to hold health behaviour conversations with patients.

Which ethical values underpin England's National Health Service reset of paediatric and maternity services following COVID-19: a rapid review

OBJECTIVE

To identify ethical values guiding decision making in resetting non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services in the National Health Service (NHS).

DESIGN

A rapid review of academic and grey literature sources from 29 April to 31 December 2020, covering non-urgent, non-COVID-19 healthcare. Sources were thematically synthesised against an adapted version of the UK Government's Pandemic Flu Ethical Framework to identify underpinning ethical principles. The strength of normative engagement and the quality of the sources were also assessed.

SETTING

NHS maternity and paediatric surgery services in England.

RESULTS

Searches conducted 8 September-12 October 2020, and updated in March 2021, identified 48 sources meeting the inclusion criteria. Themes that arose include: staff safety; collaborative working - including mutual dependencies across the healthcare system; reciprocity; and inclusivity in service recovery, for example, by addressing inequalities in service access. Embedded in the theme of staff and patient safety is embracing new ways of working, such as the rapid roll out of telemedicine. On assessment, many sources did not explicitly consider how ethical principles might be applied or balanced against one another. Weaknesses in the policy sources included a lack of public and user involvement and the absence of monitoring and evaluation criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that relationality is a prominent ethical principle informing resetting NHS non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services. Sources explicitly highlight the ethical importance of seeking to minimise disruption to caring and dependent relationships, while simultaneously attending to public safety. Engagement with ethical principles was ethics-lite, with sources mentioning principles in passing rather than explicitly applying them. This leaves decision makers and healthcare professionals without an operationalisable ethical framework to apply to difficult reset decisions and risks inconsistencies in decision making. We recommend further research to confirm or refine the usefulness of the reset phase ethical framework developed through our analysis.

Prioritizing the Mental Health and Well-Being of Healthcare Workers: An Urgent Global Public Health Priority

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on health systems in most countries, and in particular, on the mental health and well-being of health workers on the frontlines of pandemic response efforts. The purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based overview of the adverse mental health impacts on healthcare workers during times of crisis and other challenging working conditions and to highlight the importance of prioritizing and protecting the mental health and well-being of the healthcare workforce, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. First, we provide a broad overview of the elevated risk of stress, burnout, moral injury, depression, trauma, and other mental health challenges among healthcare workers. Second, we consider how public health emergencies exacerbate these concerns, as reflected in emerging research on the negative mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers. Further, we consider potential approaches for overcoming these threats to mental health by exploring the value of practicing self-care strategies, and implementing evidence based interventions and organizational measures to help protect and support the mental health and well-being of the healthcare workforce. Lastly, we highlight systemic changes to empower healthcare workers and protect their mental health and well-being in the long run, and propose policy recommendations to guide healthcare leaders and health systems in this endeavor. This paper acknowledges the stressors, burdens, and psychological needs of the healthcare workforce across health systems and disciplines, and calls for renewed efforts to mitigate these challenges among those working on the frontlines during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.