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








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
BMC Med Ethics ; 25(1): 31, 2024 Mar 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38504267

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The prioritization protocols for accessing adult critical care in the extreme pandemic context contain tiebreaker criteria to facilitate decision-making in the allocation of resources between patients with a similar survival prognosis. Besides being controversial, little is known about the public acceptability of these tiebreakers. In order to better understand the public opinion, Quebec and Ontario's protocols were presented to the public in a democratic deliberation during the summer of 2022. OBJECTIVES: (1) To explore the perspectives of Quebec and Ontario citizens regarding tiebreakers, identifying the most acceptable ones and their underlying values. (2) To analyze these results considering other public consultations held during the pandemic on these criteria. METHODS: This was an exploratory qualitative study. The design involved an online democratic deliberation that took place over two days, simultaneously in Quebec and Ontario. Public participants were selected from a community sample which excluded healthcare workers. Participants were first presented the essential components of prioritization protocols and their related issues (training session day 1). They subsequently deliberated on the acceptability of these criteria (deliberation session day 2). The deliberation was then subject to thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants from the provinces of Quebec (n = 20) and Ontario (n = 27) took part in the online deliberation. A diverse audience participated excluding members of the healthcare workforce. Four themes were identified: (1) Priority to young patients - the life cycle - a preferred tiebreaker; (2) Randomization - a tiebreaker of last resort; (3) Multiplier effect of most exposed healthcare workers - a median acceptability tiebreaker, and (4) Social value - a less acceptable tiebreaker. CONCLUSION: Life cycle was the preferred tiebreaker as this criterion respects intergenerational equity, which was considered relevant when allocating scarce resources to adult patients in a context of extreme pandemic. Priority to young patients is in line with other consultations conducted around the world. Additional studies are needed to further investigate the public acceptability of tiebreaker criteria.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Ontário/epidemiologia , Quebeque , Pandemias , Cuidados Críticos
3.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 28(3): 259-263, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38504209

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Dermatology consultations in Québec, Canada, face accessibility challenges, with most dermatologists concentrated in urban areas. Teledermatology, offering remote diagnosis and treatment, holds promise in overcoming these limitations. However, concerns regarding patient-doctor relationships and logistical issues exist. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to introduce a dermatology patient learning pathway (PLP) developed by the Centre of Excellence on Partnership with Patients and the Public (CEPPP), focusing on knowledge, abilities, and skills mobilized by patients and their loved ones at key moments of the life course with an illness, as well as emerging educational needs. METHODS: The PLP development was co-developed with dermatology patient and caregiver partners, stakeholders, and the CEPPP team. The process encompassed stakeholder engagement, exploration, recruitment of patient and caregiver partners, co-development of the PLP draft, and validation through consensus building. RESULTS: The PLP methodology led to the creation of 44 learning objectives, comprising a total of 107 subobjectives. These objectives were organized into 8 phases of the patient life course with a dermatological condition: (1) prevention and predisposition; (2) discovery, self-examination, or observation of a change; (3) first consultation; (4) wandering; (5) consultation with a dermatologist; (6) diagnosis; (7) treatments; and (8) living with it. CONCLUSIONS: The dermatology PLP serves as a resource outlining patient competency across different stages of managing a dermatological condition throughout their life course. In the context of teledermatology, the PLP might facilitate patient and caregiver engagement by helping select appropriate information and tools to support active participation in care.


Assuntos
Dermatologia , Dermatopatias , Telemedicina , Humanos , Dermatopatias/diagnóstico , Dermatopatias/terapia , Dermatologia/educação , Quebeque , Relações Médico-Paciente , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto , Cuidadores/educação
4.
Bioethics ; 38(2): 153-163, 2024 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38105613

RESUMO

Living labs are interdisciplinary and participatory initiatives aimed at bringing research closer to practice by involving stakeholders in all stages of research. Living labs align with the principles of participatory research methods as well as recent insights about how participatory ways of generating knowledge help to change practices in concrete settings with respect to specific problems. The participatory, open, and discussion-oriented nature of living labs could be ideally suited to accompany ethical reflection and changes ensuing from reflection. To our knowledge, living labs have not been explicitly trialed and reported in ethics literature. In this discussion paper, we report and discuss four initial issues that marked the process of setting up a living lab in ethics: (1) determining the goals and expected outcomes of an ethics living lab; (2) establishing operational procedures; (3) selecting communities and defining pilot projects; and (4) adopting a lens to tackle emerging questions and challenges. We explain these four issues and present the paths taken based on the novel and specific orientation, that is, living ethics, at the basis of this project. In alignment with living ethics and É-LABO, we approach challenges as learning opportunities to ask not only "how" questions but also "why" questions. We hope that this discussion paper informed by our experience helps to clarify the theoretical, methodological, and practical approaches necessary to successfully adopt and employ living labs in ethics.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA