How should respiratory depression and loss of airway patency be handled during initiation of palliative sedation?

BACKGROUND

Loss of airway patency has been reported during initiation of palliative sedation. In present guidelines the loss of airway patency during initiation of palliative sedation is not addressed. Airway patency can be restored by jaw thrust/chin lift or placing the patient in the recovery position.

AIM

A structured ethical analysis of how respiratory depression and loss of airway patency during initiation of palliative sedation should be handled. The essence of the dilemma is whether it is appropriate to apply simple non-invasive methods to restore airway patency in order to avoid the patient's immediate death.

DESIGN

A structured analysis based on the four principles of healthcare ethics and stakeholders' interests.

RESULTS

Beneficence and autonomy support a decision not to regain airway patency whereas non-maleficence lends weight to a decision to restore airway patency. Whether the proportionality criterion of the principle of double effect is met depends on the features of the individual case. The ethical problem appears to be a genuine dilemma where important values and arguments point to different conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Whether to restore airway patency when the airway is obstructed during initiation of palliative sedation will ultimately be based on clinical judgment taking into account both any known patient preferences and relevant clinical information. There are strong arguments favoring both options in this clinical and ethical dilemma. The fact that a clear and universal recommendation cannot be made does not imply indifference regarding what is the clinically and ethically best option for each individual patient.

Inconsistencies in rater-based assessments mainly affect borderline candidates: but using simple heuristics might improve pass-fail decisions

INTRODUCTION

Research in various areas indicates that expert judgment can be highly inconsistent. However, expert judgment is indispensable in many contexts. In medical education, experts often function as examiners in rater-based assessments. Here, disagreement between examiners can have far-reaching consequences. The literature suggests that inconsistencies in ratings depend on the level of performance a to-be-evaluated candidate shows. This possibility has not been addressed deliberately and with appropriate statistical methods. By adopting the theoretical lens of ecological rationality, we evaluate if easily implementable strategies can enhance decision making in real-world assessment contexts.

METHODS

We address two objectives. First, we investigate the dependence of rater-consistency on performance levels. We recorded videos of mock-exams and had examiners (N=10) evaluate four students' performances and compare inconsistencies in performance ratings between examiner-pairs using a bootstrapping procedure. Our second objective is to provide an approach that aids decision making by implementing simple heuristics.

RESULTS

We found that discrepancies were largely a function of the level of performance the candidates showed. Lower performances were rated more inconsistently than excellent performances. Furthermore, our analyses indicated that the use of simple heuristics might improve decisions in examiner pairs.

DISCUSSION

Inconsistencies in performance judgments continue to be a matter of concern, and we provide empirical evidence for them to be related to candidate performance. We discuss implications for research and the advantages of adopting the perspective of ecological rationality. We point to directions both for further research and for development of assessment practices.

Ought the level of sedation to be reduced during deep palliative sedation? A clinical and ethical analysis

BACKGROUND

Deep palliative sedation (DPS) is applied as a response to refractory suffering at the end of life when symptoms cannot be relieved in an awake state. DPS entails a dilemma of whether to provide uninterrupted sedation-in which case DPS would turn into deep and continuous palliative sedation (DCPS) -to minimise the risk that any further intolerable suffering will occur or whether to pause sedation to avoid unnecessary sedation. DPS is problematic in that it leaves the patient 'socially dead' by eradicating their autonomy and conscious experiences.

AIM

To perform a normative ethical analysis of whether guidelines should recommend attempting to elevate consciousness during DPS.

DESIGN

A structured analysis based on the four principles of healthcare ethics and consideration of stakeholders' interests.

RESULTS

When DPS is initiated it reflects that symptom relief is valued above the patient's ability to exercise autonomy and experience social interaction. However, if a decrease in symptom burden occurs, waking could be performed without patients experiencing suffering. Such pausing of deep sedation would satisfy the principles of autonomy and beneficence. Certain patients require substantial dose increases to maintain sedation. Waking such patients risks causing distressing symptoms. This does not happen if deep sedation is kept uninterrupted. Thus, the principle of non-maleficence points towards not pausing sedation. The authors' clinical ethics analysis demonstrates why other stakeholders' interests do not appear to override arguments in favour of providing uninterrupted sedation.

CONCLUSION

Stopping or pausing DPS should always be considered, but should not be routinely attempted.

Blurred lines: Ethical challenges related to autonomy in home-based care

BACKGROUND

Home-based care workers mainly work alone in the patient's home. They encounter a diverse patient population with complex health issues. This inevitably leads to several ethical challenges.

AIM

The aim is to gain insight into ethical challenges related to patient autonomy in home-based care and how home-based care staff handle such challenges.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The study is based on a 9-month fieldwork, including participant observation and interviews in home-based care. Data were analysed with a thematic analysis approach.

PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT

The study took place within home-based care in three municipalities in Eastern Norway, with six staff members as key informants.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research evaluated the study. All participants were competent to consent and signed an informed consent form.

FINDINGS

A main challenge was that staff found it difficult to respect the patient's autonomy while at the same time practicing appropriate care. We found two main themes: Autonomy and risk in tension; and strategies to balance autonomy and risk. These were explicated in four sub-themes: Refusing and resisting care; when choosing to live at home becomes risky; sweet-talking and coaxing; and building trust over time. Staff's threshold for considering the use of coercion appeared to be high.

CONCLUSIONS

Arguably, home-based care staff need improved knowledge of coercion and the legislation regulating it. There is also a need for arenas for ethics reflection and building of competence in balancing ethical values in recurrent ethical problems.

A study of the experience of Norwegian IVF physicians in evaluating the parenting capacity of patients

RESEARCH QUESTION

How do Norwegian fertility doctors assess the parenting capacity of applicants, and how do they experience and evaluate the assessment practice?

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study with 14 Norwegian fertility doctors. Interviews were analysed with systematic text condensation, a qualitative analysis framework.

RESULTS

Norwegian fertility doctors deem parenting capacity assessments of applicants to be straightforward and simple in most cases. Yet, some cases of doubt pose difficulties. Physicians can then draw on resources such as colleagues, physicians from other specialties who know the patient and patient records. All the participating physicians agreed with the principle of parenting capacity assessment for patients seeking fertility treatment. The assessment enabled physicians to refuse patients whom they thought should definitely not have responsibility for children. The physicians' main argument was their own felt responsibility for the future child. Even though assessments could be challenging, the participants all thought of themselves as competent to perform them. Indeed, some thought that delegating the assessments would imply abdicating a responsibility that was properly theirs. Although national guidelines might aid decision-making, the physicians would not want guidelines to curtail the significant discretion that they exercised.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether societies should assess applicants' capacity for parenthood before fertility treatment is an ethical and political question. Although sometimes a difficult task, Norwegian fertility doctors see it as important, and as something they are competent and suited to undertake.

Balancing burdens of infection control: Norwegian district medical officers' ethical challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

In several countries, district medical officers (DMOs) are public health experts with duties including infection control measures. The Norwegian DMOs have been key actors in the local handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The aim of the study was to explore the ethical challenges experienced by Norwegian DMOs during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how the DMOs have handled these challenges. 15 in-depth individual research interviews were performed and analyzed with a manifest approach.

RESULTS

Norwegian DMOs have had to handle a large range of significant ethical problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Often, a common denominator has been the need to balance burdens of the contagion control measures for different individuals and groups. In another large set of issues, the challenge was to achieve a balance between safety understood as effective contagion prevention on the one hand, and freedom, autonomy and quality of life for the same individuals on the other.

CONCLUSIONS

The DMOs have a central role in the municipality's handling of the pandemic, and they wield significant influence. Thus, there is a need for support in decision-making, both from national authorities and regulations, and from discussions with colleagues.

Trust in healthcare before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Public trust is often advantageous for health authorities during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Norwegian health authorities used the public´s high trust to control the pandemic, resulting in relatively few casualties.

METHODS

We wanted to describe and compare the Norwegian public trust in GPs, public healthcare, information and treatment in hospitals before and during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, we wanted to investigate the relationship between somatic or mental illness, and trust in GPs and public health information, and to develop a theoretical understanding of the relationship between trust in healthcare institutions, generalised trust and the societal situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed two surveys, the first in December 2019; the second in May 2020, thus providing two snapshots of the Norwegian public's trust in healthcare and healthcare actors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

There was statistically significant increased trust in public healthcare, in treatment at hospital and in information at hospital after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a non-significant rise in trust in GPs. We found that trust in public health information was not related to mental health nor having a chronic, somatic disease.

CONCLUSION

The findings confirm that the Norwegian public's trust in healthcare and healthcare actors is high. The trust levels are also relatively stable, and even show an increase during the early phases of the pandemic. We suggest that there is a dynamic relationship between trust in public health information, healthcare institutions, generalised trust and a societal crisis situation such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the GP-patient trust seems less affected by a crisis situation, than the public´s trust in healthcare institutions. This difference may be explained by the relative stability caused by mandates of trust obtained from the patient.

Evaluating a clinical ethics committee (CEC) implementation process in an oncological research hospital: protocol for a process evaluation study using normalisation process theory (EvaCEC)

INTRODUCTION

A Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) is a multi-professional service whose aim is to support healthcare professionals (HPs) and healthcare organisations to deal with the ethical issues of clinical practice.Although CEC are quite common worldwide, their successful implementation in a hospital setting presents many challenges.EVAluating a Clinical Ethics Committee implementation process (EvaCEC) will evaluate the implementation of a CEC in a comprehensive cancer centre in Northern Italy 16 months after its establishment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

EvaCEC is a mixed-method study with a retrospective quantitative analysis and a prospective qualitative evaluation by a range of data collection tools to enable the triangulation of data sources and analysis. Quantitative data related to the amount of CEC activities will be collected using the CEC's internal databases. Data on the level of knowledge, use and perception of the CEC will be collected through a survey with closed-ended questions disseminated among all the HPs employed at the healthcare centre. Data will be analysed with descriptive statistics.The Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) will be used for the qualitative evaluation to determine whether and how the CEC can be successfully integrated into clinical practice. We will perform one-to-one semistructured interviews and a second online survey with different groups of stakeholders who had different roles in the implementation process of the CEC. Based on NPT concepts, the interviews and the survey will assess the acceptability of the CEC within the local context and needs and expectations to further develop the service.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has been approved by the local ethics committee. The project is co-chaired by a PhD candidate and by a healthcare researcher with a doctorate in bioethics and expertise in research. Findings will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and workshops.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05466292.

Citizen attitudes to non-treatment decision making: a Norwegian survey

BACKGROUND

Decisions about appropriate treatment at the end of life are common in modern healthcare. Non-treatment decisions (NTDs), comprising both withdrawal and withholding of (potentially) life-prolonging treatment are in principle accepted in Norway. However, in practice they may give rise to significant moral problems for health professionals, patients and next of kin. Here, patient values must be considered. It is relevant to study the moral views and intuitions of the general population on NTDs and special areas of contention such as the role of next of kin in decision-making.

METHODS

Electronic survey to members of a nationally representative panel of Norwegian adults. Respondents were presented with vignettes describing patients with disorders of consciousness, dementia, and cancer where patient preferences varied. Respondents answered ten questions about the acceptability of non-treatment decision making and the role of next of kin.

RESULTS

We received 1035 complete responses (response rate 40.7%). A large majority, 88%, supported the right of competent patients to refuse treatment in general. When an NTD was in line with the patient's previously expressed preferences, more respondents tended to find NTDs acceptable. More respondents would accept NTDs for themselves than for the vignette patients. In a scenario with an incompetent patient, clear majorities wanted the views of next of kin to be given some but not decisive weight, and more weight if concordant with the patient's wishes. There were, however, large variations in the respondents' views.

CONCLUSION

This survey of a representative sample of the Norwegian adult population indicates that attitudes to NTDs are often in line with national laws and guidelines. However, the high variance among the respondents and relatively large weight given to next of kin's views, indicate a need for appropriate dialogue among all stakeholders to prevent conflicts and extra burdens. Furthermore, the emphasis given to previously expressed opinions indicates that advance care planning may increase the legitimacy of NTDs and prevent challenging decision-making processes.

Duty to treat and perceived risk of contagion during the COVID-19 pandemic: Norwegian physicians' perspectives and experiences-a questionnaire survey

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic actualised the dilemma of how to balance physicians´ obligation to treat patients and their own perceived risk of being infected. To discuss this in a constructive way we need empirical studies of physicians´ views of this obligation.

METHODS

A postal questionnaire survey was sent to a representative sample of Norwegian physicians in December 2020. We measured their perceived obligation to expose themselves to infection, when necessary, in order to provide care, concerns about being infected themselves, for spreading the virus to patients or to their families. We used descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

The response rate was 1639/2316 (70.9%), 54% women. Of doctors < 70, 60,2% (95% CI 57.7-62.7) acknowledged to some or a large degree an obligation to expose themselves to risk of infection, and 42.0% (39.5-44.5) held this view despite a scarcity of personal protective equipment (PPE). Concern about being infected oneself to some or to a large extent was reported by 42.8% (40.3-45.3), 47.8% (45.3-50.3) reported concern about spreading the virus to patients, and 63.9% (61.5-66.3) indicated worry about spreading it to their families. Being older increased the odds of feeling obligated (ExpB = 1.02 p < 0.001), while experiencing scarcity of PPE decreased the odds (ExpB = 0.74, p = 0.01). The odds of concern about spreading virus to one´s family decreased with higher age (Exp B = 0.97, p < 0.001), increased with being female (Exp B = 1.44, p = 0.004), and perceived lack of PPE (Exp B = 2.25, p < 0.001). Although more physicians working in COVID-exposed specialties experienced scarcity of PPE and reported perceived increased risks for health personnel, the odds of concern about being infected themselves or spreading the virus to their families were not higher than for other doctors.

CONCLUSION

These empirical findings lead to the question if fewer physicians in the future will consider the duty to treat their top priority. This underscores the need to revisit and revitalise existing ethical codes to handle the dilemma between physicians´ duty to treat versus the duty to protect physicians and their families. This is important for the ability to provide good care for the patient and the provider in a future pandemic situation.

Research, education, ethics consultation: evaluating a Bioethics Unit in an Oncological Research Hospital

BACKGROUND

This study aims to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the activities of a Bioethics Unit (BU) 5 years since its implementation (2016-2020). The BU is a research unit providing empirical research on ethical issues related to clinical practice, clinical ethics consultation, and ethical education for health care professionals (HPS).

METHODS

We performed an explanatory, sequential, mixed-method, observational study, using the subsequent qualitative data to explain the initial quantitative findings. Quantitative data were collected from an internal database and analyzed by descriptive analysis. Qualitative evaluation was performed by semi-structured interviews with 18 HPs who were differently involved in the BU's activities and analyzed by framework analysis.

RESULTS

Quantitative results showed an extensive increment of the number of BU research projects over the years and the number of work collaborations with other units and wards. Qualitative findings revealed four main themes, concerning: 1. the reasons for contacting the BU and the type of collaboration; 2. the role of the bioethicist; 3. the impact of BU activities on HPs, in terms of developing deeper and more mature thinking; 4. the need to extend ethics support to other settings. Overall, our results showed that performing both empirical bioethics research and more traditional clinical ethics activities at the same unit would produce an impetus to increase collaboration and spread an 'ethical culture' among local HPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings contribute to a growing body of literature on the models of clinical ethics support services and the role of empirical research in bioethics internationally. They also prepare the ground for the implementation of a multidisciplinary Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) that aims to support the BU's ethics consultation service within the local context.

The importance of patient characteristics, operators, and image quality for accurate diagnoses of heart failure by general practitioners using hand-held ultrasound

Background

Echocardiography is a cornerstone in diagnosing heart failure (HF). Hand-held ultrasound devices (HUDs) are established diagnostic tools. After a period of training, inexperienced users can utilize HUDs in HF diagnostics. Developments have allowed for decision-support software such as automatic analyses of ejection fraction (autoEF), mitral annular plane systolic excursion (autoMAPSE) and telemedicine. It is not well established how patient characteristics, operator qualifications and image quality influence the clinical usefulness of HUDs. Furthermore, it is not known whether associations of patient-, operator- and image quality characteristics with diagnostic accuracy is consistent across different decision-support software.

Purpose

To evaluate associations of patient-, operator- and image quality characteristics with the accuracy of HF diagnostics by general practitioners (GPs) using HUDs with and without decision-support software.

Method

After a period of training, five GPs examined outpatients with suspected HF. They examined the patients clinically and subsequently by adding HUD examinations, autoEF and autoMAPSE. Recorded images were interpreted by external cardiologists using a telemedical software program, giving immediate feedback to the GPs. After each step the GPs considered whether the patients had HF. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by comparing to reference echocardiograms by cardiologists. Image quality was evaluated by external cardiologists scoring each of the categories; LV view, LV alignment, apical misposition, mitral annular assessment and visible segments. The associations of possible predictors with the diagnostic accuracy were tested by univariate regression.

Results

Of 166 patients, 28 were diagnosed with HF after reference examinations. The GPs correctly diagnosed 72% of the patients after HUD examinations, 55% after autoMAPSE, 57% after autoEF and 76% after telemedical support. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was present in 40 patients, 27 had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and 121 had body mass index &gt;25 kg/m2. Ongoing AF was significantly associated with reduced accuracy using HUD examination alone and in combination with autoEF (p&lt;0.05). No other patient characteristics were associated with GPs' diagnostic accuracy. There were significant differences between different operators when autoMAPSE was used (p&lt;0.05). Image quality indices were not significantly associated with diagnostic accuracy (p≥0.2).

Conclusion

Atrial fibrillation and operator characteristics were associated with reduced diagnostic accuracy when basing diagnosis on automatic decision support software. No other association of neither patient-, operator- nor image quality characteristics with the accuracy of GP diagnostics was found. Thus, it is important that the clinical society is aware of the limited to modest accuracy of HF diagnostics by inexperienced users of hand-held ultrasound including novel decision-support software.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): Research council of NorwayNorwegian University of Science and Technology

Guidelines and clinical priority setting during the COVID-19 pandemic - Norwegian doctors' experiences

Background

In the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, strong measures were taken to avoid anticipated pressure on health care, and this involved new priorities between patient groups and changing working conditions for clinical personnel. We studied how doctors experienced this situation. Our focus was their knowledge about and adherence to general and COVID-19 specific guidelines and regulations on priority setting, and whether actual priorities were considered acceptable.

Methods

In December 2020, 2 316 members of a representative panel of doctors practicing in Norway received a questionnaire. The questions were designed to consider a set of hypotheses about priority setting and guidelines. The focus was on the period between March and December 2020. Responses were analyzed with descriptive statistics and regression analyses.

Results

In total, 1 617 (70%) responded. A majority were familiar with the priority criteria, though not the legislation on priority setting. A majority had not used guidelines for priority setting in the first period of the pandemic. 60.5% reported that some of their patients were deprioritized for treatment. Of these, 47.5% considered it medically indefensible to some/a large extent. Although general practitioners (GPs) and hospital doctors experienced deprioritizations equally often, more GPs considered it medically indefensible. More doctors in managerial positions were familiar with the guidelines.

Conclusions

Most doctors did not use priority guidelines in this period. They experienced, however, that some of their patients were deprioritized, which was considered medically indefensible by many. This might be explained by a negative reaction to the externally imposed requirements for rationing, while observing that vulnerable patients were deprioritized. Another interpretation is that they judged the rationing to have gone too far, or that they found it hard to accept rationing of care in general. Priority guidelines can be useful measures for securing fair and reasonable priorities. However, if the priority setting in clinical practice is to proceed in accordance with priority-setting principles and guidelines, the guidelines must be translated into a clinically relevant context and doctors’ familiarity with them must improve.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08582-2.

Navigating abortion law dilemmas: experiences and attitudes among Ethiopian health care professionals

BACKGROUND

Ethiopia's 2005 abortion law improved access to legal abortion. In this study we examine the experiences of abortion providers with the revised abortion law, including how they view and resolve perceived moral challenges.

METHODS

Thirty healthcare professionals involved in abortion provisions in Addis Ababa were interviewed. Transcripts were analyzed using systematic text condensation, a qualitative analysis framework.

RESULTS

Most participants considered the 2005 abortion law a clear improvement-yet it does not solve all problems and has led to new dilemmas. As a main finding, the law appears to have opened a large space for professionals' individual interpretation and discretion concerning whether criteria for abortion are met or not. Regarding abortion for fetal abnormalities, participants support the woman's authority in deciding whether to choose abortion or not, although several saw these decisions as moral dilemmas. All thought that abortion was a justified choice when a diagnosis of fetal abnormality had been made.

CONCLUSION

Ethiopian practitioners experience moral dilemmas in connection with abortion. The law places significant authority, burden and responsibility on each practitioner.

Establishing Clinical Ethics Committees in Primary Care: A Study from Norwegian Municipal Care

Would primary care services benefit from the aid of a clinical ethics committee (CEC)? The implementation of CECs in primary care in four Norwegian municipalities was supported and their activities followed for 2.5 years. In this study, the CECs’ structure and activities are described, with special emphasis on what characterizes the cases they have discussed. In total, the four CECs discussed 54 cases from primary care services, with the four most common topics being patient autonomy, competence and coercion; professionalism; cooperation and disagreement with next of kin; and priority setting, resource use and quality. Nursing homes and home care were the primary care services most often involved. Next of kin were present in 10 case deliberations, whereas patients were never present. The investigation indicates that it might be feasible for new CECs to attain a high level of activity including case deliberations within the time frame. It also confirms that significant, characteristic and complex moral problems arise in primary care services.

Positive attitudes to advance care planning - a Norwegian general population survey

Background

Authorities recommend advance care planning and public acceptance of it is a prerequisite for widespread implementation. Therefore, we did the first study of the Norwegian public with an aim of getting knowledge on their attitudes to issues related to advance care planning.

Methods

An electronic survey to a nationally representative web panel of Norwegian adults.

Results

From 1035 complete responses (response rate 40.7%), we found that more than nine out of ten of the general public wanted to participate in advance care planning, believed it to be useful for many, and wanted to make important healthcare decisions themselves. Almost nine out of ten wanted to be accompanied by next of kin during advance care planning. Most (69%) wanted health care personnel to initiate advance care planning and preferred it to be timed to serious illness with limited lifetime (68%). Only about 9% stated that health care personnel should have the final say in healthcare decisions in serious illness.

Conclusions

Developing and implementing advance care planning as a public health initiative seems warranted based on the results of this study. Patient perspectives should be promoted in decision-making processes. Nevertheless, training of health care personnel should emphasise voluntariness and an individual approach to initiating, timing and conducting advance care planning because of individual variations.

Clinical ethics committees in nursing homes: what good can they do? Analysis of a single case consultation

Background:

Ought nursing homes to establish clinical ethics committees (CECs)? An answer to this question must begin with an understanding of how a clinical ethics committee might be beneficial in a nursing home context – to patients, next of kin, professionals, managers, and the institution. With the present article, we aim to contribute to such an understanding.

Aim:

We ask, in which ways can clinical ethics committees be helpful to stakeholders in a nursing home context? We describe in depth a clinical ethics committee case consultation deemed successful by stakeholders, then reflect on how it was helpful.

Research design:

Case study using the clinical ethics committee’s written case report and self-evaluation form, and two research interviews, as data.

Participants and research context:

The nursing home’s ward manager and the patient’s son participated in research interviews.

Ethical considerations:

Data were collected as part of an implementation study. Clinical ethics committee members and interviewed stakeholders consented to study participation, and also gave specific approval for the publication of the present article.

Findings/results:

Six different roles played by the clinical ethics committee in the case consultation are described: analyst, advisor, support, moderator, builder of consensus and trust, and disseminator.

Discussion:

The case study indicates that clinical ethics committees might sometimes be of help to stakeholders in moral challenges in nursing homes.

Conclusions:

Demanding moral challenges arise in the nursing home setting. More research is needed to examine whether clinical ethics committees might be suitable as ethics support structures in nursing homes and community care.

Public attitudes and health law in conflict: somatic vs. mental care, role of next of kin, and the right to refuse treatment and information

Background

Norwegian law and regulations regarding patient autonomy and the use of coercion are in conflict with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the Oviedo Convention on several points. A new law concerning the use of coercion in Norwegian health services has been proposed. In this study we wanted to investigate the attitudes of the Norwegian lay populace with regards to some of these points of conflict.

Methods

An electronic questionnaire with 9 propositions about patient autonomy, the use of coercion, the role of next of kin, and equality of rights and regulations across somatic and mental health care was completed by 1617 Norwegian adults (response rate 8.5%).

Results

A majority of respondents support the patient’s right to refuse treatment and information in serious illness, that previously expressed treatment preferences should be respected, that next of kin’s right to information and authority in clinical decision-making should be strengthened, and that this kind of legal regulations should be equal across somatic and mental health care.

Conclusions

The findings in this study suggest that the opinions of the Norwegian lay populace are in conflict with the national law on several points relating to patient autonomy, the role of next of kin and use of coercive measures, and different legal regulation of somatic vs. mental health care. The study suggests that the populace is more in line with the CRPD, which supports equal rights across somatic and mental health care, and the Oviedo Convention, which does not allow for the same degree of strong paternalism regarding coercive measures as the current Norwegian law. This can be taken to support the recently proposed legislation on the use and limitation of coercion in Norwegian health services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-020-05990-0.

Ethical challenges in home-based care: A systematic literature review

Because of the transfer of responsibility from hospitals to community-based settings, providers in home-based care have more responsibilities and a wider range of tasks and responsibilities than before, often with limited resources. The increased responsibilities and the complexity of tasks and patient groups may lead to several ethical challenges. A systematic search in the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SveMed+ was carried out in February 2019 and August 2020. The research question was translated into a modified PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) worksheet. A total of 40 articles were included. The review is conducted according to the Vancouver Protocol. The main findings from the systematic literature review show that ethical challenges experienced by healthcare and social care providers in home-based care are related to autonomy and balancing ethical principles, decisions regarding intensity of care, challenges related to priority settings, truth-telling, and balancing the professional role. Findings regarding ethical challenges within home-based care are in line with findings from institutional healthcare and social care settings. However, some significant differences from the institutional context are also highlighted.

Professionals' experience with conscientious objection to abortion in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: An interview study

In Ethiopia, conscientious objection (CO) to abortion provision is not allowed due to government regulations. We here report findings from a qualitative interview study of 30 healthcare professionals from different professions working with abortion in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. CO is practised despite the regulations forbidding it. Most informants appeared to be unfamiliar with the prohibition or else did not accord it weight in their moral reasoning. Proponents of institutionalization/toleration of CO claimed that accommodation was often feasible in a hospital setting because colleagues could take over. Opponents pointed to threats to patient access in rural settings especially. Both proponents and opponents invoked tenets of professional ethics, viz., the right not to be coerced into actions one deems unacceptable, or the duty to provide care, respectively. More societal and professional discussion of the ethics and regulation of CO, and a clearer link between legal regulation and ethical guidance for professionals, are called for.

Clinical and ethical aspects of palliative sedation with propofol-A retrospective quantitative and qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The anesthetic propofol is often mentioned as a drug that can be used in palliative sedation. The existing literature of how to use propofol in palliative sedation is scarce, with lack of information about how propofol could be initiated for palliative sedation, doses and treatment outcomes.

AIM

To describe the patient population, previous and concomitant medication, and clinical outcome when propofol was used for palliative sedation.

METHODS

A retrospective study with quantitative and qualitative data. All patients who during a 4.5-year period received propofol for palliative sedation at the Department of palliative medicine, Akershus University Hospital, Norway were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were included. In six patients the main indication for palliative sedation was pain, in seven dyspnoea and in one delirium. In eight of these cases propofol was chosen because of the pharmacokinetic properties (rapid effect), and in the remaining cases propofol was chosen because midazolam in spite of dose titration failed to provide sufficient symptom relief. In all patients sedation and adequate symptom control was achieved during manual dose titration. During the maintenance phase three of 14 patients had spontaneous awakenings. At death, propofol doses ranged from 60 to 340 mg/hour.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe suffering at the end of life can be successfully treated with propofol for palliative sedation. This can be performed in palliative medicine wards, but skilled observation and dose titration throughout the period of palliative sedation is necessary. Successful initial sedation does not guarantee uninterrupted sedation until death.

EDITORIAL COMMENT

In palliative care, some patients at the end of life can reach a stage where there have been maximal analgesic and or anxiolytic treatments though without achieving comfort in the awake state. This report describes and discusses use of propofol in these infrequent cases to relieve suffering as part of palliative care.

Implementing clinical ethics committees as a complex intervention: presentation of a feasibility study in community care

Background

How should clinical ethics support services such as clinical ethics committees (CECs) be implemented and evaluated? We argue that both the CEC itself and the implementation of the CEC should be considered as ‘complex interventions’.

Main text

We present a research project involving the implementation of CECs in community care in four Norwegian municipalities. We show that when both the CEC and its implementation are considered as complex interventions, important consequences follow – both for implementation and the study thereof. Emphasizing four such sets of consequences, we argue, first, that the complexity of the intervention necessitates small-scale testing before larger-scale implementation and testing is attempted; second, that it is necessary to theorize the intervention in sufficient depth; third, that the identification of casual connections charted in so-called logic models allows the identification of factors that are vital for the intervention to succeed and which must therefore be studied; fourth, that an important part of a feasibility study must be to identify and chart as many as possible of the causally important contextual factors.

Conclusion

The conceptualization of the implementation of a CEC as a complex intervention shapes the intervention and the way evaluation research should be performed, in several significant ways. We recommend that researchers consider whether a complex intervention approach is called for when studying CESS implementation and impact.

Ethics reflection groups for school nurses

BACKGROUND

School nurses have great responsibilities as the connecting link between school, children/adolescents, parents, and other healthcare services. Being in this middle position, and handling complex situations and problems related to children in school, may be demanding and also lead to ethical challenges. Clinical ethics support, such as ethics reflection groups, may be of help when dealing with ethical challenges. However, there is little research on experiences with ethics reflection groups among school nurses.

AIM

The aim of this research was to explore how nurses in school healthcare experience their role, and how they experience participation in ethics reflection groups, using a model for systematic ethics reflection, the Centre for Medical Ethics model.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The project had a qualitative design, using focus group interviews and thematic analysis.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study was evaluated by the Data Protection Official at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (project no. 57373). The participants were given oral and written information about the study and signed a written consent.

PARTICIPANTS AND CONTEXT

Twelve participants from school healthcare were recruited to the interviews.

FINDINGS

School nurses described their role as extremely challenging. How the school nurses experienced their role also influenced how they experienced participating in ethics reflection groups. The Centre for Medical Ethics model was experienced as both challenging and comprehensive. However, they also experienced that the model helped them to clarify their role and could also help them to find better solutions.

CONCLUSION

The role as school nurse is complex and demanding, with several ethical challenges. Ethics reflection groups may be of great help when dealing with these challenges. However, it is of great importance that the methods used are adjusted to the professionals' needs and context.

Still a moral dilemma: how Ethiopian professionals providing abortion come to terms with conflicting norms and demands

Background

The Ethiopian law on abortion was liberalized in 2005. However, as a strongly religious country, the new law has remained controversial from the outset. Many abortion providers have religious allegiances, which begs the question how to negotiate the conflicting demands of their jobs and their commitment to their patients on the one hand, and their religious convictions and moral values on the other.

Method

A qualitative study based on in-depth interviews with 30 healthcare professionals involved in abortion services in either private/non-governmental clinics or in public hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Transcripts were analyzed using systematic text condensation, a qualitative analysis framework.

Results

For the participants, religious norms and the view that the early fetus has a moral right to life count against providing abortion; while the interests and needs of the pregnant woman supports providing abortion services. The professionals weighed these value considerations differently and reached different conclusions. One group appears to have experienced genuine conflicts of conscience, while another group attempted to reconcile religious norms and values with their work, especially through framing provision of abortion as helping and preventing harm and suffering. The professionals handle this moral balancing act on their own. In general, participants working in the private sector reported less moral dilemma with abortion than did their colleagues from public hospitals.

Conclusions

This study highlights the difficulties in reconciling tensions between religious convictions and moral norms and values, and professional duties. Such insights might inform guidelines and healthcare ethics education.

Importance of systematic deliberation and stakeholder presence: a national study of clinical ethics committees

BACKGROUND

Case consultation performed by clinical ethics committees (CECs) is a complex activity which should be evaluated. Several evaluation studies have reported stakeholder satisfaction in single institutions. The present study was conducted nationwide and compares clinicians' evaluations on a range of aspects with the CEC's own evaluation.

METHODS

Prospective questionnaire study involving case consultations at 19 Norwegian CECs for 1 year, where consultations were evaluated by CECs and clinicians who had participated.

RESULTS

Evaluations of 64 case consultations were received. Cases were complex with multiple ethical problems intertwined. Clinicians rated the average CEC consult highly, being both satisfied with the process and perceiving it to be useful across a number of aspects. CEC evaluations corresponded well with those of clinicians in a large majority of cases. Having next of kin/patients present was experienced as predominantly positive, though practised by only half of the CECs. The educational function of the consult was evaluated more positively when the CEC used a systematic deliberation method.

CONCLUSIONS

CEC case consultation was found to be a useful service. The study is also a favourable evaluation of the Norwegian CEC system, implying that it is feasible to implement well-functioning CECs on a large scale. There are good reasons to involve the stakeholders in the consultations as a main rule.

Refusals to perform ritual circumcision: a qualitative study of doctors' professional and ethical reasoning

Background

Ritual circumcision of infant boys is controversial in Norway, as in many other countries. The procedure became a part of Norwegian public health services in 2015. A new law opened for conscientious objection to the procedure. We have studied physicians’ refusals to perform ritual circumcision as an issue of professional ethics.

Method

Qualitative interview study with 10 urologists who refused to perform ritual circumcision from six Norwegian public hospitals. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analysed with systematic text condensation, a qualitative analysis framework.

Results

The physicians are unanimous in grounding their opposition to the procedure in professional standards and norms, based on fundamental tenets of professional ethics. While there is homogeneity in the group when it comes to this reasoning, there are significant variations as to how deeply the matter touches the urologists on a personal level. About half of them connect their stance to their personal integrity, and state that performing the procedure would go against their conscience and lead to pangs of conscience.

Conclusions

It is argued that professional moral norms sometimes might become more or less ‘integrated’ in the professional’s core moral values and moral identity. If this is the case, then the distinction between conscience-based and professional refusals to certain healthcare services cannot be drawn as sharply as it has been.

Can clinical ethics committees be legitimate actors in bedside rationing?

Background

Rationing and allocation decisions at the clinical level – bedside rationing – entail complex dilemmas that clinicians and managers often find difficult to handle. There is a lack of mechanisms and aids for promoting fair decisions, especially in hard cases. Reports indicate that clinical ethics committees (CECs) sometimes handle cases that involve bedside rationing dilemmas. Can CECs have a legitimate role to play in bedside rationing?

Main text

Aided by two frameworks for legitimate priority setting, we discuss how CECs can contribute to enhanced epistemic, procedural and political legitimacy in bedside rationing decisions. Drawing on previous work we present brief case vignettes and outline several potential roles that CECs may play, and then discuss whether these might contribute to rationing decisions becoming legitimate. In the process, key prerequisites for such legitimacy are identified. Legitimacy places demands on aspects such as the CEC’s deliberation process, the involvement of stakeholders, transparency of process, the opportunity to appeal decisions, and the competence of CEC members. On these conditions, CECs can help strengthen the legitimacy of some of the rationing decisions clinicians and managers have to make.

Conclusions

On specified conditions, CECs can have a well-justified advisory role to play in order to enhance the legitimacy of bedside rationing decisions.

Secularity, abortion, assisted dying and the future of conscientious objection: modelling the relationship between attitudes

Background

Controversies arise over abortion, assisted dying and conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare. The purpose of the study was to examine the relationship between attitudes towards these bioethical dilemmas, and secularity and religiosity.

Method

Data were drawn from a 2017 web-based survey of a representative sample of 1615 Norwegian adults. Latent moderated structural equations modelling was used to develop a model of the relationship between attitudes.

Results

The resulting model indicates that support for abortion rights is associated with pro-secular attitudes and is a main “driver” for support for assisted dying and opposition to conscientious objection.

Conclusions

This finding should be regarded as a hypothesis which ought to be tested in other populations. If the relationship is robust and reproduced elsewhere, there are important consequences for CO advocates who would then have an interest in disentangling the debate about CO from abortion; and for health systems who ought to consider carefully how a sound policy on CO can safeguard both patient trust in the services and the moral integrity of professionals. It is suggested that if religiosity wanes and pro-secular and pro-abortion attitudes become more widespread, support for CO might decline, putting into question whether present policies of toleration of conscientious refusals will remain acceptable to the majority.

Doctors' attitudes to assisted dying

BAKGRUNN

Aktiv dødshjelp er ulovlig i Norge, men et flertall av befolkningen støtter legalisering. Legers holdninger til aktiv dødshjelp ble sist undersøkt i 1993. Har legers holdninger endret seg?

MATERIALE OG METODE

To spørreundersøkelser sendt til Legeforskningsinstituttets legepanel i henholdsvis 2014 og 2016 inneholdt spørsmål om aktiv dødshjelp. Svarene ble analysert med deskriptiv statistikk og logistisk regresjonsanalyse.

RESULTATER

Svarprosenten var henholdsvis 75,0 (2014) og 73,1 (2016). Majoriteten var motstandere av legalisering av aktiv dødshjelp. I 2016-undersøkelsen sa 9,1 % av respondentene seg «svært enig» og 21,5 % «litt enig» i at legeassistert selvmord bør tillates for personer som har «en dødelig sykdom med kort forventet levetid». Yngre og ikke-religiøse var oftere positive til legalisering. I 2014-undersøkelsen svarte 8,6 % at de ville ha vært villige til å utføre legeassistert selvmord hvis dette ble tillatt.

FORTOLKNING

Som i 1993 var et flertall av norske leger imot aktiv dødshjelp, men det synes å være flere enn før som støttet legalisering i visse tilfeller. De færreste var selv villige til å utføre aktiv dødshjelp hvis det ble tillatt.

Conscientious objection to intentional killing: an argument for toleration

Background

In the debate on conscientious objection in healthcare, proponents of conscience rights often point to the imperative to protect the health professional’s moral integrity. Their opponents hold that the moral integrity argument alone can at most justify accommodation of conscientious objectors as a “moral courtesy”, as the argument is insufficient to establish a general moral right to accommodation, let alone a legal right.

Main text

This text draws on political philosophy in order to argue for a legal right to accommodation. The moral integrity arguments should be supplemented by the requirement to protect minority rights in liberal democracies. Citizens have a right to live in accordance with their fundamental moral convictions, and a right to equal access to employment. However, this right should not be unconditional, as that would unduly infringe on the rights of other citizens. The right must be limited to cases where the moral basis is more fundamental in a sense that all reasonable citizens in a liberal democracy should accept, such as the constitutive role of the inviolability of human life in liberal democracies.

Conclusion

There should be a legal, yet circumscribed, right to accommodation for conscientious objectors refusing to provide healthcare services that they reasonably consider to involve the intentional killing of a human being.

Attitudes to prenatal screening among Norwegian citizens: liberality, ambivalence and sensitivity

BACKGROUND

Norway's liberal abortion law allows for abortion on social indications, yet access to screening for fetal abnormalities is restricted. Norwegian regulation of, and public discourse about prenatal screening and diagnosis has been exceptional. In this study, we wanted to investigate whether the exceptional regulation is mirrored in public attitudes.

METHOD

An electronic questionnaire with 11 propositions about prenatal screening and diagnosis was completed by 1617 Norwegian adults (response rate 8.5%).

RESULTS

A majority of respondents supports increased access to prenatal screening with ultrasound (60%) and/or full genome sequencing of fetal DNA (55%) available for all pregnant women. Significant minorities indicate, however, that a public offer of prenatal screening for all pregnant women would signal that people with Down syndrome are unwanted (46%) or could be criticized for contributing to a 'sorting society' (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate deeper ambivalences and a cultural sensitivity to the ethical challenges of prenatal screening and subsequent abortions. The specific diagnosis of Down syndrome and the fear of becoming a 'sorting society' which sorts human life due to diagnoses, appear to play prominent roles in citizen deliberations. The low response rate means that a non-response bias cannot be excluded, yet reasons why results are still likely to be of value are discussed.

In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article

BACKGROUND

What is good bioethics? Addressing this question is key for reinforcing and developing the field. In particular, a discussion of potential quality criteria can heighten awareness and contribute to the quality of bioethics publications. Accordingly, the objective of this article is threefold: first, we want to identify a set of criteria for quality in bioethics. Second, we want to illustrate the added value of a novel method: in-depth analysis of a single article with the aim of deriving quality criteria. The third and ultimate goal is to stimulate a broad and vivid debate on goodness in bioethics.

METHODS

An initial literature search reveals a range of diverse quality criteria. In order to expand on the realm of such quality criteria, we perform an in-depth analysis of an article that is acclaimed for being exemplary.

RESULTS

The analysis results in eleven specific quality criteria for good bioethics in three categories: argumentative, empirical, and dialectic. Although we do not claim that the identified criteria are universal or absolute, we argue that they are fruitful for fueling a continuous constitutive debate on what is "good bioethics."

CONCLUSION

Identifying, debating, refining, and applying such criteria is an important part of defining and improving bioethics.

Between professional values, social regulations and patient preferences: medical doctors' perceptions of ethical dilemmas

BACKGROUND

We present and discuss the results of a Norwegian survey of medical doctors' views on potential ethical dilemmas in professional practice.

METHODS

The study was conducted in 2015 as a postal questionnaire to a representative sample of 1612 doctors, among which 1261 responded (78%). We provided a list of 41 potential ethical dilemmas and asked whether each was considered a dilemma, and whether the doctor would perform the task, if in a position to do so. Conceptually, dilemmas arise because of tensions between two or more of four doctor roles: the patient's advocate, a steward of societal interests, a member of a profession and a private individual.

RESULTS

27 of the potential dilemmas were considered dilemmas by at least 50% of the respondents. For more than half of the dilemmas, the anticipated course of action varied substantially within the professional group, with at least 20% choosing a different course than their colleagues, indicating low consensus in the profession.

CONCLUSIONS

Doctors experience a large range of ethical dilemmas, of which many have been given little attention by academic medical ethics. The less-discussed dilemmas are characterised by a low degree of consensus in the profession about how to handle them. There is a need for medical ethicists, medical education, postgraduate courses and clinical ethics support to address common dilemmas in clinical practice. Viewing dilemmas as role conflicts can be a fruitful approach to these discussions.

How to succeed with ethics reflection groups in community healthcare? Professionals’ perceptions

Background:

Healthcare personnel in the municipal healthcare systems experience many ethical challenges in their everyday work. In Norway, 243 municipalities participated in a national ethics project, aimed to increase ethical competence in municipal healthcare services. In this study, we wanted to map out what participants in ethics reflection groups experienced as promoters or as barriers to successful reflection.

Objectives:

To examine what the staff experience as promoters or as barriers to successful ethics reflection.

Research design:

The study has a qualitative design, where 56 participants in municipal healthcare participated in 10 different focus-group interviews.

Ethical considerations:

The data collection was based on the participants’ informed consent and approved by the Data Protection Official of the Norwegian Centre for Research Data.

Results:

The informants had different experiences from ethics reflection group. Nevertheless, we found that there were several factors that were consistently mentioned: competence, facilitator’s role, ethics reflection groups organizing, and organizational support were all experienced as promoters and as a significant effect on ethics reflection groups. The absence of such factors would constitute important barriers to successful ethics reflection.

Discussion:

The results are coincident with other studies, and indicate some conditions that may increase the possibility to succeed with ethics reflection groups. A systematic approach seems to be important, the systematics of the actual reflections, but also in the organization of ethics reflection group at the workplace. Community healthcare is characterized by organizational instabilities as many vacancies, high workloads, and lack of predictability. This can be a hinder for ethics reflection group.

Conclusion:

Both internal and external factors seem to influence the organization of ethics reflection group. The municipalities’ instabilities challenging this work, and perceived as a clear inhibitor for the development. The participants experienced that the facilitator is the most important success factor for establishing, carrying out, and to succeed with ethics reflection groups.

Roles and responsibilities of clinical ethics committees in priority setting

BACKGROUND

Fair prioritization of healthcare resources has been on the agenda for decades, but resource allocation dilemmas in clinical practice remain challenging. Can clinical ethics committees (CECs) be of help? The aim of the study was to explore whether and how CECs handle priority setting dilemmas and contribute to raising awareness of fairness concerns.

METHOD

Descriptions of activities involving priority setting in annual reports from Norwegian CECs (2003-2015) were studied and categorized through qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-nine reports from 38 CECs were studied. We found 78 activities where resource use or priority setting were explicitly highlighted as main topics. Of these, 29 were seminars or other educational activities, 21 were deliberations on individual patient cases, whereas 28 were discussions of principled or general cases. Individual patient cases concerned various distributional dilemmas where values were at stake. Six main topics and seven roles for the CEC were identified. CECs handle issues concerning the introduction of new costly drugs, extraordinarily costly established treatment, the application of priority setting criteria, resource use for vulnerable groups, resource constraints compromising practice, and futility of care. The CEC can act as an analyst, advisor, moderator, disseminator, facilitator, watch dog, and guardian of values and laws.

DISCUSSION

In order to fulfil their responsibilities in handling priority setting cases, CECs need knowledge of both the ethics and the institutionalized systems of priority setting. There is potential for developing this aspect of the CECs' work further.

CONCLUSIONS

The Norwegian CECs are involved in priority setting decisions where they can play multiple constructive roles. In particular, they advise and raise awareness of ethical aspects in resource allocations; bridge clinical practice with higher-level decisions; and promote fair resource allocation and stakeholder rights and interests.