Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Correct Health Care ; 30(3): 198-205, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38597931

RESUMEN

Health care professionals and patients impacted by incarceration face unique medical, legal, and ethical issues. The frequency and nature of ethics consultations for these patients are underexplored. This study aimed to characterize the primary ethical issue and contextual features of ethics consultations involving patients impacted by incarceration. We conducted a qualitative concept content analysis of ethics consultations involving patients impacted by incarceration and calculated descriptive statistics of demographics to compare these patients with the broader population of patients impacted by incarceration at a single institution from January 1, 2015, through June 30, 2022. We identified 37,184 patients impacted by incarceration (people currently or formerly incarcerated or whose surrogate decision-maker is incarcerated) at our institution. Most were White (70%) and non-Hispanic (88%); 51% were male, 49% female. Individuals impacted by incarceration comprised 3% (n = 38) of ethics consults. Most were White (58%), male (79%), and hospitalized (92%). The primary ethical issues were surrogate decision-making (34%) and fiduciary duties (beneficence/nonmaleficence/best interest; 16%). The primary contextual feature was intra-family communication challenges (37%). Incarceration status impacts access to decision-makers and the provision of medically necessary care. Ethics consultation for women and individuals in outpatient and emergency settings could be underutilized. More education about ethics consultation services and coordination with correctional officials is recommended.


Asunto(s)
Consultoría Ética , Prisioneros , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Prisioneros/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Toma de Decisiones , Encarcelamiento
2.
AEM Educ Train ; 8(2): e10963, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38525365

RESUMEN

Objectives: There is no standardized protocol for performing educational point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) that addresses patient-centered ethical issues such as obtaining informed consent. This study sought to define principles for ethical application of educational POCUS and develop consensus-based best practice guidance. Methods: A questionnaire was developed by a trained ethicist after literature review with the help of a medical librarian. A diverse panel including experts in medical education, law, and bioethics; medical trainees; and individuals with no medical background was convened. The panel voted on their level of agreement with ethical principles and degree of appropriateness of behaviors in three rounds of a modified Delphi process. A high level of agreement was defined as 80% or greater consensus. Results: Panelists voted on 38 total items: 15 related to the patient consent and selection process, eight related to practices while performing educational POCUS, and 15 scenarios involving POCUS application. A high level of agreement was achieved for 13 items related to patient consent and selection, eight items related to performance practices, and 10 scenarios of POCUS application. Conclusions: Based on expert consensus, ethical best practices include obtaining informed consent before performing educational POCUS, allowing patients to decline educational POCUS, informing patients the examination is not intended to be a part of their medical evaluation and is not billed, using appropriate draping techniques, maintaining a professional environment, and disclosing incidental findings in coordination with the primary team caring for the patient. These practices could be implemented at institutions to encourage ethical use of educational POCUS when training physicians, fellows, residents, and medical students.

3.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 70(11): 3070-3079, 2022 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35420158

RESUMEN

Guardianship may pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who must balance protecting vulnerable patients from potential safety concerns with respecting their autonomy. Older adults with dementia are particularly susceptible to loss of independence and the ability to participate in medical decision making. To have the capacity for medical decision making, individuals must understand relevant information, appreciate their circumstances, demonstrate reasoning, and express a consistent choice free from coercion. Although capacity assessments are usually task-specific, geriatricians and other specialists may be asked to comment on capacity more globally. These determinations may be used to support a Petition for the Appointment of a Guardian of a Legally Incapacitated Adult, the legal process of pursuing guardianship in probate court. Assigned guardians may be known to the incapacitated individual (e.g., a family member or friend) or may be professional guardians with no prior relationship to the ward. Guardians are encouraged to use substituted decision-making, taking into account the ward's previously expressed values and preferences. Although a number of viable alternatives to guardianship exist, numerous systemic barriers may prevent these from being fully explored. The ongoing need for guardianship should be periodically revisited and reassessed. Data about guardians and wards is shockingly sparse, as there are no centralized databases. Laws and regulations for guardianships vary significantly between states. Physicians can serve as important allies and advocates for patients with cognitive impairment at risk of incapacity, can help preserve their autonomy for as long as possible, and ensure appropriate protections are in place if the patient does lose their decision-making ability.


Asunto(s)
Toma de Decisiones , Tutores Legales , Humanos , Anciano , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas
4.
Soc Work Health Care ; 53(5): 503-17, 2014.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24835092

RESUMEN

This tool is a unique comprehensive scale and methodology to measure the psychosocial acuity of patients and families across a health care continuum. Coupled with other measures, psychosocial acuity can tell a complete and compelling story of social work contributions and aid in resource alignment. Accurately conveying the full scope of social work value to anyone, especially health system leadership, requires that the psychosocial acuity of the patient and family be measured and factored into the equation, along with productivity, time spent, and services provided. The development and utilization of the Psychosocial Acuity Tool is the focus of this publication.


Asunto(s)
Familia/psicología , Pacientes/psicología , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Servicio Social/normas , Estado de Salud , Vivienda , Renta , Salud Mental , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/normas , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Apoyo Social , Servicio Social/métodos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Transportes
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...