RESUMO
CONTEXT: The Covid-19 pandemic has added a new chapter to discussions about the professional duty to care. To understand how Covid-19 may have changed medical students' ethical attitudes towards this duty, we analysed policies written before and during the pandemic by first-year students completing a yearly educational exercise focused on work requirement expectations for healthcare professionals during a hypothetical epidemic. METHODS: Within a repeated cross-sectional design, consensus coding was performed on policies written over 5 years (2017-2021) using a codebook based on eight questions from the educational exercise for summative content analysis. Frequencies provided summative results and comparisons across years used Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We analysed 142 written policies from 2017 to 2021 representing 884 first-year students working in small groups. Students' commitment to the duty to care remained stable during the Covid-19 pandemic, but during the pandemic, students were more likely to support exceptions to the duty to care (e.g. for healthcare professionals with medical conditions or concern for household members' health) and more likely to expect institutions to provide safe working conditions. Ethical values supporting students' policies were largely consistent before and during the pandemic, the most common being beneficence, justice, duty to care, non-maleficence and utility. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that students' support for the duty to care remained strong during the Covid-19 pandemic. We also found that students supported exceptions to this duty to reflect the needs of healthcare professionals and their families and that they expected institutions to provide safe working conditions. These findings can help inform ethics education and future pandemic preparedness.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Sepsis is a common cause of death. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services severe sepsis/septic shock (SEP-1) bundle is focused on improving sepsis outcomes, but it is unknown which quality improvement (QI) practices are associated with SEP-1 compliance and reduced sepsis mortality. The objectives of this study were to compare sepsis QI practices in SEP-1 reporting and nonreporting hospitals and to measure the association between sepsis QI processes, SEP-1 performance, and sepsis mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study linked survey data on QI practices from Iowa hospitals to SEP-1 performance data and mortality. Characteristics of hospitals and sepsis QI practices were compared by SEP-1 reporting status. Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated the association of QI practices with SEP-1 performance and observed-to-expected sepsis mortality ratios. RESULTS: One hundred percent of Iowa's 118 hospitals completed the survey. SEP-1 reporting hospitals were more likely to have sepsis QI practices, including reporting sepsis quality to providers (64% versus 38%, P = 0.026) and using the case review process to develop sepsis care plans (87% versus 64%, P = 0.013). Sepsis QI practices were not associated with increased SEP-1 scores. A sepsis registry was associated with decreased odds of being in the bottom quartile of sepsis mortality (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.96, P = 0.041), and presence of a sepsis committee was associated with lower hospital-specific mortality (observed-to-expected ratio, -0.11; 95% confidence interval, -0.20 to 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals reporting SEP-1 compliance conduct more sepsis QI practices. Most QI practices are not associated with increased SEP-1 performance or decreased sepsis mortality. Future work could explore how to implement these performance improvement practices in hospitals not reporting SEP-1 compliance.
