RESUMO
Medical pharmaceutical and device manufacturers are essential in making products that benefit patients, and collaboration between health care providers and industry is necessary in the design, testing, and manufacture of these medical products. However, health care providers must recognize that their duties and the interests of industry may, at times, diverge. Relationships with industry, even seemingly minor ones, have the potential to shape the decisions made on behalf of patients. The marketing divisions of pharmaceutical and medical device firms view health care providers as a target of their efforts, and some of the interactions that occur between industry and health care providers have the potential to alter decision making in ways that may not necessarily benefit patients. Health care providers have an ethical duty to recognize situations and marketing strategies that are designed to influence their choice of diagnostic and therapeutic options for their patients. Health care providers should be aware of the techniques used to attempt to alter their behavior and guard against them.
Assuntos
Indústria Farmacêutica , Marketing , Atenção à Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Preparações FarmacêuticasRESUMO
Medical pharmaceutical and device manufacturers are essential in making products that benefit patients, and collaboration between health care clinicians and the industry is necessary for the design and manufacture of these medical products. However, health care clinicians must recognize that their duties and the interests of the industry may at times diverge. Relationships with the industry, even seemingly minor ones, have the potential to shape the decisions made on behalf of patients. The marketing divisions of pharmaceutical and medical device firms view health care clinicians as targets of their efforts, and some of the interactions that occur between the industry and health care clinicians have the potential to alter decision making in ways that may not necessarily benefit patients. Health care clinicians have an ethical duty to recognize situations and marketing strategies that are designed to influence their choice of diagnostic and therapeutic options for their patients. At a minimum, health care clinicians should be aware of the techniques used to attempt to alter their behavior and guard against them.
Assuntos
Indústria Farmacêutica , Marketing , Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Preparações FarmacêuticasRESUMO
Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted health care institutions worldwide to develop plans for allocation of scarce resources in crisis capacity settings. These plans frequently rely on rapid deployment of institutional triage teams that would be responsible for prioritizing patients to receive scarce resources; however, little is known about how these teams function or how to support team members participating in this unique task. Objective: To identify themes illuminating triage team members' perspectives and experiences pertaining to the triage process. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was conducted using inductive thematic analysis of observations of Washington state triage team simulations and semistructured interviews with participants during the COVID-19 pandemic from December 2020 to February 2021. Participants included clinician and ethicist triage team members. Data were analyzed from December 2020 through November 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Emergent themes describing the triage process and experience of triage team members. Results: Among 41 triage team members (mean [SD] age, 50.3 [11.4] years; 21 [51.2%] women) who participated in 12 simulations and 21 follow-up interviews, there were 5 Asian individuals (12.2%) and 35 White individuals (85.4%); most participants worked in urban hospital settings (32 individuals [78.0%]). Three interrelated themes emerged from qualitative analysis: (1) understanding the broader approach to resource allocation: participants strove to understand operational and ethical foundations of the triage process, which was necessary to appreciate their team's specific role; (2) contending with uncertainty: team members could find it difficult or feel irresponsible making consequential decisions based on limited clinical and contextual patient information, and they grappled with ethically ambiguous features of individual cases and of the triage process as a whole; and (3) transforming mindset: participants struggled to disentangle narrow determinations about patients' likelihood of survival to discharge from implicit biases and other ethically relevant factors, such as quality of life. They cited the team's open deliberative process, as well as practice and personal experience with triage as important in helping to reshape their usual cognitive approach to align with this unique task. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that there were challenges in adapting clinical intuition and training to a distinctive role in the process of scarce resource allocation. These findings suggest that clinical experience, education in ethical and operational foundations of triage, and experiential training, such as triage simulations, may help prepare clinicians for this difficult role.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Triagem , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Qualidade de Vida , Alocação de Recursos , WashingtonRESUMO
This paper addresses the just distribution of vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and sets forth an ethical framework that prioritises frontline and essential workers, people at high risk of severe disease or death, and people at high risk of infection. Section I makes the case that vaccine distribution should occur at a global level in order to accelerate development and fair, efficient vaccine allocation. Section II puts forth ethical values to guide vaccine distribution including helping people with the greatest need, reducing health disparity, saving the most lives and promoting narrow social utility. It also responds to objections which claim that earlier years have more value than later years. Section III puts forth a practical ethical framework to aid decision-makers and compares it with alternatives.
RESUMO
Patients pursuing solid organ transplantation are encouraged to receive many vaccines on an accelerated timeline. Vaccination prior to transplantation offers the best chance of developing immunity and may expand the pool of donor organs that candidates can accept without needing posttransplant therapy. Furthermore, transplant recipients are at greater risk for acquiring vaccine-preventable illnesses or succumbing to severe sequelae of such illnesses. However, a rising rate of vaccine refusal has challenged transplant centers to address the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy. Transplant centers may need to consider adopting a policy of denial of solid organ transplantation on the basis of vaccine refusal for non-medical reasons (i.e., philosophical or religious objections or personal beliefs that vaccines are unnecessary or unsafe). Arguments supporting such a policy are motivated by utility, stewardship, and beneficence. Arguments opposing such a policy emphasize justice and respect for persons, and seek to avoid worsening inequities or medical coercion. This paper examines these arguments and situates them within the special cases of pediatric transplantation, emergent transplantation, and living donation. Ultimately, a uniform national policy addressing vaccine refusal among transplant candidates is needed to resolve this ethical dilemma and establish a consistent, fair, and standard approach to vaccine refusal in transplantation.
Assuntos
Transplante de Órgãos , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , Vacinas , Criança , Revisão Ética , Humanos , Transplantados , VacinaçãoRESUMO
Clinical ethics consultants provide a range of services in hospital settings and in teaching environments. Training to achieve the skills needed to meet the expectations of employers comes in various forms, ranging from on-the-job training to formal fellowship training programs. We surveyed graduates of clinical ethics fellowships to evaluate their self-reported preparedness for their first job after fellowship training. The results indicated several areas of need, including greater exposure to program-building skills, quality improvement skills, and approaches to working with members of higher administration. These data will be of use to educators as well as to fellows who advocate for elements of training in preparation for their first position.
Assuntos
Ética Clínica/educação , Bolsas de Estudo , Adulto , Estudos de Avaliação como Assunto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Autorrelato , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosAssuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Socorristas , Prioridades em Saúde/ética , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Alocação de Recursos/ética , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Pandemias/ética , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has or threatens to overwhelm health care systems. Many institutions are developing ventilator triage policies. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the development of ventilator triage policies and compare policy content. DESIGN: Survey and mixed-methods content analysis. SETTING: North American hospitals associated with members of the Association of Bioethics Program Directors. PARTICIPANTS: Program directors. MEASUREMENTS: Characteristics of institutions and policies, including triage criteria and triage committee membership. RESULTS: Sixty-seven program directors responded (response rate, 91.8%); 36 (53.7%) hospitals did not yet have a policy, and 7 (10.4%) hospitals' policies could not be shared. The 29 institutions providing policies were relatively evenly distributed among the 4 U.S. geographic regions (range, 5 to 9 policies per region). Among the 26 unique policies analyzed, 3 (11.3%) were produced by state health departments. The most frequently cited triage criteria were benefit (25 policies [96.2%]), need (14 [53.8%]), age (13 [50.0%]), conservation of resources (10 [38.5%]), and lottery (9 [34.6%]). Twenty-one (80.8%) policies use scoring systems, and 20 of these (95.2%) use a version of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Among the policies that specify the triage team's composition (23 [88.5%]), all require or recommend a physician member, 20 (87.0%) a nurse, 16 (69.6%) an ethicist, 8 (34.8%) a chaplain, and 8 (34.8%) a respiratory therapist. Thirteen (50.0% of all policies) require or recommend that those making triage decisions not be involved in direct patient care, but only 2 (7.7%) require that their decisions be blinded to ethically irrelevant considerations. LIMITATION: The results may not be generalizable to institutions without academic bioethics programs. CONCLUSION: Over one half of respondents did not have ventilator triage policies. Policies have substantial heterogeneity, and many omit guidance on fair implementation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Respiração Artificial/ética , Respiração Artificial/normas , Triagem/ética , Triagem/normas , Betacoronavirus , Bioética , COVID-19 , Política de Saúde , Hospitais , Humanos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos , Ventiladores Mecânicos/provisão & distribuiçãoRESUMO
Our aims are to (1) set forth a multiprinciple system for selecting among clinical trials competing for limited space in an immunotherapy production facility that supplies products under investigation by scientific investigators; (2) defend this system by appealing to justice principles; and (3) illustrate our proposal by showing how it might be implemented. Our overarching aim is to assist manufacturers of immunotherapeutic products and other potentially breakthrough experimental therapies with the ethical task of prioritizing requests from scientific investigators when production capacity is limited.
Assuntos
Indústria Farmacêutica/ética , Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde/ética , Instalações de Saúde/ética , Prioridades em Saúde , Imunoterapia , Neoplasias/terapia , Justiça Social , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Experimentação Humana , Humanos , Neoplasias/imunologia , PesquisadoresRESUMO
Policies to remove parents' ability to opt-out from school immunization requirements on the basis of religious or personal beliefs (ie, nonmedical exemptions) may be a useful strategy to increase immunization rates and prevent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease. However, there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of this strategy and the range of possible outcomes. We advocate for a more deliberative process through which a broad range of outcomes is scrutinized and the balance of values underlying the policy decision to eliminate nonmedical exemptions is clearly articulated. We identify 3 outcomes that require particular consideration before policies to eliminate nonmedical exemptions are implemented widely and outline a process for making the values underlying such policies more explicit.
Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Política de Saúde , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Criança , Humanos , Pais , Instituições Acadêmicas , Recusa do Paciente ao TratamentoRESUMO
Our goals are to (1) set forth and defend a multiprinciple system for selecting individuals who meet trial eligibility criteria to participate in early phase clinical trials testing chimeric antigen receptor (CAR T-cell) for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia when demand for participation exceeds spaces available in a trial; (2) show the relevance of these selection criteria to other breakthrough experimental therapies; (3) argue that distinct distributive justice criteria apply to breakthrough experimental therapies, standard research and healthcare and (4) argue that as evidence of benefit increases, the emphasis of justice in research shifts from protecting subjects from harm to ensuring fair access to benefits.
Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/ética , Experimentação Humana/ética , Terapia de Alvo Molecular , Seleção de Pacientes/ética , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/terapia , Receptores de Antígenos de Linfócitos T , Sujeitos da Pesquisa , Adolescente , Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Ética em Pesquisa , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/ética , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Masculino , Terapia de Alvo Molecular/métodos , Obrigações Morais , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/ética , Receptores de Antígenos de Linfócitos T/uso terapêutico , Medição de Risco , Adulto JovemRESUMO
We argue that medical decisions on behalf of children should be made with the welfare of the child as the primary interest, that parents should generally be allowed to determine which options optimize the interests of their child, and that those decisions should be formally challenged only when the parental decision places the child at substantial risk of a serious harm as compared to the option favored by the health-care provider. In situations where moral ambiguity exists and no possible solution could unequivocally be declared the right or good one, a parental decision favoring one or the other of the reasonable options should be supported. Parents should be provided with adequate time to consider information provided and weigh the various options presented. If parents find themselves unable to make a decision, we suggest several strategies for shared decision-making. Finally, we recommend setting time points for reassessment of the situation following each therapeutic change to allow reevaluation of whether the chosen path should be altered.
Assuntos
Tomada de Decisões/ética , Crianças com Deficiência , Lactente Extremamente Prematuro , Pais/psicologia , Pediatria/ética , Temas Bioéticos , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Princípios Morais , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
Thousands of U.S. parents choose to refuse or delay the administration of selected vaccines to their children each year, and some choose not to vaccinate their children at all. While most physicians continue to provide care to these families over time, using each visit as an opportunity to educate and encourage vaccination, an increasing number of physicians are choosing to dismiss these families from their practice unless they agree to vaccinate their children. This paper will examine this emerging trend along with the reasons given by those who advocate such an approach. I will argue that the strategy of refusing to allow families into a clinic unless they agree to vaccinate their children is misguided, and the arguments for doing so fail to stand up to close scrutiny. Such a strategy does not benefit the child or the health of the community, and may have a negative impact on both. Furthermore, some of the arguments in support of dismissal policies ignore the importance of professional obligation and appear to favor self-interest over the interest of the patient.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Família , Médicos/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Criança , Tomada de Decisões , Humanos , Responsabilidade Legal , Princípios Morais , Pais , Filosofia , Políticas , Saúde Pública , RiscoRESUMO
Despite the impact vaccination has had on the control and prevention of many infectious diseases, some parents choose not to vaccinate their children. Although there is no federal law requiring vaccination of children in the United States, all states require evidence of vaccination against at least some diseases as a condition of school entry. Which vaccines are required; how many doses are required; whether entry requirements apply to child care, kindergarten, or middle school; and whether exemptions from vaccine requirements will be allowed all differ by state. All but two states allow some kind of personal belief exemption from school vaccination requirements. This article reviews the history of school vaccination requirements and exemptions, the legal status of state vaccination laws and exemptions, the impact of school vaccination requirements and personal belief exemptions on vaccination rates and disease incidence, and strategies for maintaining adequate vaccination rates in states that allow personal belief exemptions.
Assuntos
Cultura , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Instituições Acadêmicas/legislação & jurisprudência , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Política de Saúde , Humanos , Imunidade Coletiva , Incidência , Saúde Pública , Religião , Instituições Acadêmicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
This article considers how to approach assent from children for genomics research. We examine the "protection" rationale for assent, which emerged in the context of a historical debate regarding whether it was ever acceptable to subject children to risks of research for the benefit of others. We also consider the "development" rationale for assent, which has been articulated for pediatric clinical practice, as an alternative approach for addressing this issue. We consider these rationales in light of the more recent literature on pediatric assent in the research context, and suggest that "engagement" is a more useful construct. This construct emphasizes that children have development capacities that should be respected and includes a limited role for assent to allow children to protect themselves. Engaging children does not require disclosure of all of the benefits and risks of genomics research that might be conveyed to an adult and may permit a degree of parental control over decisions. Using a construct that emphasizes respect can also justify asking children, as they approach adulthood, about their willingness to participate in ongoing genomics research, and yet also permit research to continue if some cannot be reached to obtain consent.
Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Genômica/ética , Pediatria/ética , Sujeitos da Pesquisa , Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Criança , Genética Médica/economia , Genética Médica/ética , Genética Médica/métodos , Genômica/métodos , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Pediatria/economiaRESUMO
Today in the United States, outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease are often traced to susceptible children whose parents have claimed an exemption from school or child care immunization regulations. The origins of this immunization hesitancy and resistance have roots in the decline of the threat of vaccine-preventable disease coupled with an increase in concerns about the adverse effects of vaccines, the emergence of mass media and the Internet, and the intrinsic limitations of modern medicine. Appeals to emotion have drowned out thoughtful discussion in public forums, and overall, public trust in immunizations has declined. We present an often overlooked behavior change strategy-social marketing-as a way to improve immunization rates by addressing the important roots of immunization hesitancy and effectively engaging emotions. As an example, we provide a synopsis of a social marketing campaign that is currently in development in Washington state and that is aimed at increasing timely immunizations in children from birth to age 24 months.
Assuntos
Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Marketing Social , Pré-Escolar , Promoção da Saúde , Humanos , Imunização/psicologia , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Estados Unidos , WashingtonRESUMO
Several new vaccines for children and young adults have been introduced recently and now appear on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' recommended childhood and adolescent immunization schedule (meningococcal, rotavirus, human papillomavirus). As new vaccines are introduced, states face complex decisions regarding which vaccines to fund and which vaccines to require for school or child care entry. This complexity is evidenced by the current debate surrounding the human papillomavirus vaccine. We present a critique to the approach and criteria for evaluating vaccines for inclusion in mandatory school immunization programs that have been adopted by the Washington State Board of Health by illustrating how these criteria might be applied to the human papillomavirus vaccine. We conclude that these 9 criteria can help ensure a deliberate and informed approach to important public policy decisions, but we argue that several clarifications of the review process are needed along with the addition of a 10th criterion that ensures that a new vaccine mandate relates in some manner to increasing safety in the school environment.
Assuntos
Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/organização & administração , Estudos de Avaliação como Assunto , Programas de Imunização/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas Obrigatórios/legislação & jurisprudência , Infecções por Papillomavirus/prevenção & controle , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Vacinas Bacterianas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Anticâncer/administração & dosagem , Criança , Pré-Escolar , District of Columbia , Feminino , Política de Saúde , Humanos , Programas de Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Lactente , Masculino , Programas Obrigatórios/ética , Formulação de Políticas , Medição de Risco , Gestão da Qualidade Total , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas Virais/administração & dosagem , WashingtonAssuntos
Tomada de Decisões/ética , Análise Ética , Eticistas , Consultoria Ética , Obrigações Morais , Ordens quanto à Conduta (Ética Médica)/ética , Consentimento do Representante Legal/ética , Temas Bioéticos , Direito Penal , Ética Clínica , Humanos , Autonomia Pessoal , Procurador , Política Pública , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Achieving proper balance between the social good that comes from performing research that involves children and offering the appropriate level of protection to children who participate in research is a significant challenge. As investigators design and implement research protocols, they should be aware of the ethical and legal requirements that govern research with human participants. This is especially true of research that involves children and other vulnerable groups. The welfare of children participating in research depends on knowledgeable, caring, and responsible investigators who place the well-being of the research participant above all other aspects of the research project. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief overview of the history of research involving children, to provide a basis for understanding the context within which the current federal regulations were written, and to provide an overview of the regulatory requirements that relate to research involving children. Good research is ethical research, and that requires investigators who take seriously the importance of participant welfare, meaningful informed consent, and respect for research participants.