ECG-based cardiac screening programs: Legal, ethical, and logistical considerations.

Screening asymptomatic people with a resting electrocardiogram (ECG) has been theorized to detect latent cardiovascular disease. However, resting ECG screening is not recommended for numerous populations, such as asymptomatic middle-aged (sedentary) people, as it is not sufficiently sensitive to detect coronary artery disease. While the issues raised in this article are largely common to all screening programs, this review focuses on 2 distinct programs: (1) screening elite athletes for conditions associated with sudden cardiac death (SCD); and (2) screening people aged ≥65 years for atrial fibrillation (AF). These 2 settings have recently gained attention for their promise and concerns regarding prevention of SCD and stroke, respectively. If screening is to be done, it must be done well. Organizations conducting screening must consider a range of legal, ethical, and logistical responsibilities that arise from the beginning to the end of the process. This includes consideration of who to screen, timing of screening, whether screening is mandatory, consent issues, and auditing systems to ensure quality control. Good infrastructure for interpretation of ECG results according to expert guidelines and follow-up testing for abnormal screening results, including a pathway to treatment, are essential. Finally, there may be significant implications for those diagnosed with cardiac disease, including insurance, employment, the ability to play sport, and mental health issues. There are several legal risks, and the best protective measures are good communication systems, thorough clinical record-keeping, careful handling of eligibility questions for those diagnosed, and reference to expert guidelines as the standard of care.

How important is social support in determining patients' suitability for transplantation? Results from a National Survey of Transplant Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines require programmes use subjective assessments of social support when determining transplant suitability, despite limited evidence linking it to outcomes. We examined how transplant providers weigh the importance of social support for kidney transplantation compared with other factors, and variation by clinical role and personal beliefs. METHODS: The National survey of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and the Society of Transplant Social Work in 2016. Using a discrete choice approach, respondents compared two hypothetical patient profiles and selected one for transplantation. Conditional logistic regression estimated the relative importance of each factor; results were stratified by clinical role (psychosocial vs medical/surgical providers) and beliefs (outcomes vs equity). RESULTS: Five hundred and eighy-four transplant providers completed the survey. Social support was the second most influential factor among transplant providers. Providers were most likely to choose a candidate who had social support (OR=1.68, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.86), always adhered to a medical regimen (OR=1.64, 95% CI 1.46 to 1.88), and had a 15 years life expectancy with transplant (OR=1.61, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.85). Psychosocial providers were more influenced by adherence and quality of life compared with medical/surgical providers, who were more influenced by candidates' life expectancy with transplant (p<0.05). For providers concerned with avoiding organ waste, social support was the most influential factor, while it was the least influential for clinicians concerned with fairness (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Social support is highly influential in listing decisions and may exacerbate transplant disparities. Providers' beliefs and reliance on social support in determining suitability vary considerably, raising concerns about transparency and justice.

Yield and Efficiency of Mental Health Screening: A Comparison of Screening Protocols at Intake to Prison.

BACKGROUND: The value of screening for mental illness has increasingly been questioned in low prevalence settings due to high false positive rates. However, since false positive rates are related to prevalence, screening may be more effective in higher prevalence settings, including correctional institutions. We compared the yield (i.e. newly detected cases) and efficiency (i.e. false positives) of five screening protocols to detect mental illness in prisons against the use of mental health history taking (the prior approach to detecting mental illness). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We estimated the accuracy of the six approaches to detect an Axis I disorder among a sample of 467 newly admitted male inmates (83.1% participation rate). Mental health history taking identified only 41.0% (95% CI 32.1, 50.6) of all inmates with mental illness. Screening protocols identified between 61.9 and 85.7% of all cases, but referred between 2 and 3 additional individuals who did not have a mental illness for every additional case detected compared to the mental health history taking approach. In low prevalence settings (i.e. 10% or less) the screening protocols would have had between 4.6 and 16.2 false positives per true positive. CONCLUSIONS: While screening may not be practical in low prevalence settings, it may be beneficial in jails and prisons where the prevalence of mental illness is higher. Further consideration of the context in which screening is being implemented, and of the impacts of policies and clinical practices on the benefits and harms of screening is needed to determine the effectiveness of screening in these settings.

National survey of provider opinions on controversial characteristics of liver transplant candidates.

Candidate selection for liver transplantation presents challenging ethical issues that require balancing the principles of justice and utility. The goal of this study was to assess the opinions of U.S. transplant providers regarding the ways in which controversial medical and psychosocial characteristics influence patient eligibility for liver transplantation. An online, anonymous survey about adult patient characteristics was sent to providers (hepatologists, surgeons, psychiatrists, and social workers) at all 102 active adult liver transplant centers in the United States. A majority of the providers (251/444 or 56.5%) completed the survey. The providers were queried about 8 characteristics, and the 3 that were ranked most controversial were incarceration, marijuana use, and psychiatric diagnoses. Most providers identified a patient age ≥ 80 years (62.7%), a body mass index ≥ 45 kg/m2 (56.6%), and current incarceration with a lifetime sentence (54.7%) as absolute contraindications to liver transplantation. In a multivariate analysis, the identification of absolute contraindications varied significantly with the provider type, the center volume, and the geographical region. Less than half of the providers reported that their centers had written policies regarding most of the characteristics examined. In conclusion, providers differ significantly in their opinions on controversial patient characteristics and transplant contraindications. Along with a paucity of literature data on outcomes, these provider differences may play a role in the fact that many centers do not have formal policies for selecting patients with these characteristics. Evidence-based data on the outcomes of such patients are needed to guide the formation of written policies to better standardize eligibility criteria.

[Alzheimer's disease and related disorders: specificity of young onset patients, including ethical aspects]. / Maladie d'Alzheimer et syndromes apparentés : spécificités des « malades jeunes ¼, réflexions cliniques et éthiques.

The number of patients with young onset dementia (YOD) (that is before age 65) is estimated at 32,000 in France, and 5000 with onset dementia before 60 years. These patients differ from older ones by the greater number of rares causes (29%), heterogeneity of the presentation among the usual diseases, such as non-amnestic phenotypes of Alzheimer's disease, high frequency of frontal symptoms, and possible genetic origin. These aspects must be taken into account for the diagnosis, often more difficult than in older ones because patients have a little knowledge of the YOD, excepted in the genetics forms. YOD patients can still work or drive a car, and we should choose between the respect for autonomy and the security for the patient and their carers. YOD patients can be more often included in pharmacological trials because they have lower associated disorders. Individual non-pharmacological treatment should be priviledged because they don't easily accept collective activities with other patients over 60 years of age. Excepted for the very young patients (onset before 45), the survival is longer than in late onset dementia, with sometimes severe behavioral problems related to frontal syndrome. In France, the caregiving at home has been improved since the possibility for the YOD patients to receive a financial assistance reserved for the disabled patients, but admission to a nursing home before 60 is very difficult and increases the caregiver burden and perception of unfairness. There is a discrimination between young or older demented patients related to the great difficulty to meet the needs of younger patients, due to the rigidity of the medical and social systems. The presentation of a limited offer for the YOD patients must initiate reflections on our capacities to respect the autonomy and the dignity of the Alzheimer's patients regardless of age.

A psychosocial evaluation process for living liver donors: the University of Rochester model.

OBJECTIVE: The donation of livers by living donors entails complex processes, both surgically and psychosocially, potentially involving risks in both domains. Thorough psychosocial evaluation is necessary to minimize those risks, yet little has been written about the donor assessment process. This article describes one such process, utilized by a transplant program in upstate New York. METHOD: Donor candidates undergo multiple psychosocial interviews early in the overall transplant evaluation process. Evaluators subsequently meet as a group, along with an independent ethicist, to determine psychosocial candidacy prior to final medical/surgical clearance. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2007, 416 donor candidates initiated and/or underwent full evaluation, resulting in a 17.5% surgery and 55.5% exclusion rate among those individuals. Of those ruled out, 20.8% were for (medical or psychosocial) reasons associated with the recipient, and 8.7% were for donor-related psychosocial issues. CONCLUSION: Given the primacy ofpsychosocial and ethical issues in living liver donor candidate evaluation, the multiple interview process, followed by team discussion and overseen by an ethicist removed from other transplant program functions, has advantages as a donor assessment model.

Ethical reasoning about patient eligibility in allogeneic BMT based on psychosocial criteria.

Chairpersons of the hospital ethics committees (HECs) and BMT clinicians were compared with regard to their willingness to proceed with allogeneic BMT given select psychosocial risk factors. A self-administered questionnaire was sent to 62 HEC chairpersons at hospitals with an accredited BMT program; the response rate was 37%. Items included background information, followed by six case vignettes from a 2006 national survey on which BMT physicians, nurses and social workers agreed not to proceed with allogeneic BMT on the basis of the following risk factors: suicidal ideation; use of addictive, illicit drugs; history of non-compliance; absence of a caregiver; alcoholism; and mild dementia from early onset of Alzheimer's disease. Opinions regarding transplant differed in one case only, in a patient with mild dementia; 27% of HEC chairpersons recommended not proceeding with BMT, which was significantly lower than that of nurses (68%, P<0.001), physicians (63.5%, P<0.001) and social workers (51.9%, P=0.05). Qualitative data show patterns of informal reasoning, linking transplant decisions to patient's responsibility for their psychosocial risk factor(s), as well as to medical benefit and outcome.