Protective factors of ethical conflict during a pandemic-Quali-Ethics-COVID-19 research part 2: An international qualitative study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine which factors can be considered protective of ethical conflicts in intensive care unit healthcare professionals during a pandemic. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic gave rise to new ethical concerns in relation to the management of public health and the limitations on personal freedom. Continued exposure to ethical conflict can have a range of psychological consequences. DESIGN: A qualitative design based on phenomenological approach. METHODS: A total of 38 nurses and physicians who were regular staff members of Barcelona and Milan's public tertiary university hospitals and working in intensive care units during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Semi-structured online in-depth interviews were conducted. A thematic analysis was performed by two independent researchers following the seven steps of Colaizzi's methods. We adhere COREQ guidelines. RESULTS: One theme 'Protective factors of ethical conflict in sanitary crisis' and four subthemes emerged from the data: (1) knowledge of the infectious disease, (2) good communication environment, (3) psychological support and (4) keeping the same work team together. CONCLUSIONS: Four elements can be considered protective factors of ethical conflict for healthcare professionals during a sanitary crisis. While some of these factors have already been described, the joint identification of this set of four factors as a single element is, in itself, novel. This should help in ensuring the right mechanisms are in place to face future pandemics and should serve to improve institutional organisation and guarantee safe and high-quality patient care in times of healthcare crisis. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Future strategies for the prevention of ethical conflict during sanitary crises, pandemics or other catastrophes need to consider a set of four factors as a single element. These factors are the knowledge of the infectious disease, a good communication environment, psychological support and keeping the same work team together into joint consideration.

COVID-19 pandemic experiences, ethical conflict and decision-making process in critical care professionals (Quali-Ethics-COVID-19 research part 1): An international qualitative study.

AIM AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the sources of ethical conflict and the decision-making processes of ICU nurses and physicians during the first and subsequent waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: Depside several studies exploring ethical conflicts during COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have explored in depth the perceptions and experiences of critical care professionals regarding these conflicts, the decision-making process or which have analysed the complexity of actually implementing the recommendations of scientific societies and professional/healthcare institutions in interdisciplinary samples. DESIGN: A descriptive phenomenological study. METHODS: Thirty-eight in-depth interviews were conducted with critical care nurses and physicians from five hospitals in Spain and Italy between December 2020 and May 2021. A thematic content analysis of the interview transcripts was conducted by two researchers. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) were employed to ensure the quality and transparency of this study. RESULTS: Two main themes emerged as sources of ethical conflict: the approach to end of life in exceptional circumstances and the lack of humanisation and care resources. The former comprised two subthemes: end-of-life care and withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment; the latter comprised three subthemes: the impossibility of guaranteeing the same opportunities to all, fear of contagion as a barrier to taking decisions and the need to humanise care. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals sought to take their decisions in line with professional ethics and bioethical principles, but, nevertheless, they experienced moral dilemmas and moral distress when not being able to care for, or to treat, their patients as they believed fit. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Further education and training are recommended on the provision of end-of-life and post-mortem care, effective communication techniques via video calls, disclosure of bad news and bioethical models for decision-making in highly demanding situations of uncertainty, such as those experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Barriers to Advance Care Planning Implementation in Health care: An Umbrella Review with Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) refers to a process of discussions between professionals, patients, and their families, which allows the patient to define and communicate their care and treatment preferences. Understanding the barriers to advance care planning is the first step on the way to overcoming them and to improving person-centred care and attention. AIMS: To identify the barriers perceived by professionals, patients, and family members when implementing ACP in a clinical context and to analyse the methodological quality of the evidence. METHODS: An umbrella review guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute and a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA 2015 were utilized. Data were obtained from MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, The Joanna Briggs Institute, CINAHL, Scopus, and EMBASE in November 2018. RESULTS: Fourteen systematic reviews were included. The main barriers reported by professionals were lack of knowledge and skills to carry out ACP, a certain fear of starting conversations about ACP, and a lack of time for discussions. Patients and family members considered that the main barriers were fear of discussing their relative's end of life, lack of ability to carry out ACP, and not knowing who was responsible for initiating conversations about ACP. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: This review has examined the barriers presented by health professionals, patients, and family members, so that future lines of research can develop preventive or decisive measures that encourage the implementation of ACP in health care.

Association between knowledge and attitudes towards advance directives in emergency services.

BACKGROUND: Implementing the routine consultation of patient advance directives in hospital emergency departments and emergency medical services has become essential, given that advance directives constitute the frame of reference for care personalisation and respect for patients' values and preferences related to healthcare. The aim of this study was to assess the levels and relationship of knowledge and attitudes of nursing and medical professionals towards advance directives in hospital emergency departments and emergency medical services, and to determine the correlated and predictor variables of favourable attitudes towards advance directives. METHODS: Observational, descriptive, and cross-sectional study. The study was conducted in the emergency department of a second-level hospital and in the emergency medical service. Data collection was performed from January 2019 to February 2020. The STROBE guidelines were followed for the preparation of the study. RESULTS: A total of 173 healthcare professionals responded to the questionnaire. Among them, 91.3% considered that they were not sufficiently informed about advance directives, and 74% acknowledged not having incorporated them into their usual practice. Multinomial analysis indicated a statistically significant relationship between the variable emergency medical service and having more favourable attitudes towards consulting the advance directives in their practical application (OR 2.49 [95% CI 1.06-5.88]; p = 0.037) and compliance in complex scenarios (OR 3.65 [95% CI 1.58 - 8.41]; p = 0.002). Working the afternoon and night shift was a predictor variable for obtaining a higher score with respect to attitudes in complex scenarios. CONCLUSION: There is an association between the level of knowledge that nursing and medical professionals have about advance directives and the scores obtained on the attitude scales at the time of practical implementation and in complex scenarios. This shows that the more knowledge professionals have, the more likely they are to consult patients' advance directives and to respect their wishes and preferences for care and/or treatment.

Managing ethical aspects of advance directives in emergency care services.

BACKGROUND: In Hospital Emergency Department and Emergency Medical Services professionals experience situations in which they face difficulties or barriers to know patient's advance directives and implement them. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the barriers, facilitators, and ethical conflicts perceived by health professionals derived from the management of advance directives in emergency services. RESEARCH DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND CONTEXT: This is a qualitative phenomenological study conducted with purposive sampling including a population of nursing and medical professionals linked to Hospital Emergency Department and Emergency Medical Services. Three focus groups were formed, totalling 24 participants. We performed an inductive-type thematic discourse analysis. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This study was approved by ethical committees of Ethical Commitee of Clínic Hospital (Barcelona) and Comittee of Emergency Medical Services (Barcelona). The participants received information about the purpose of the study. Patients' anonymity and willingness to participate in the study were guaranteed. FINDINGS: There were four types of barriers that hindered the proper management of patients' advance directives in Hospital Emergency Department and Emergency Medical Services: personal and professional, family members, organisational and structural, and those derived from the health system. These barriers caused ethical conflicts and hindered professionals' decision-making. DISCUSSION: These results are in line with those of previous studies and indicate that factors such as gender, professional category, and years of experience, in addition to professionals' beliefs and the opinions of colleagues and family members, can also influence the professionals' final decisions. CONCLUSION: The different strategies described in this study can contribute to the development of health policies and action protocols to help reduce both the barriers that hinder the correct management and implementation of advance directives and the ethical conflicts generated.