An ethical assessment of professional opinions on concerns, chances, and limitations of the implementation of an artificial intelligence-based technology into the geriatric patient treatment and continuity of care.

With the introduction of an artificial intelligence-based dashboard into the clinic, the project SURGE-Ahead responds to the importance of improving perioperative geriatric patient treatment and continuity of care. The use of artificial intelligence to process and analyze data automatically, aims at an evidence-based evaluation of the patient's health condition and recommending treatment options. However, its development and introduction raise ethical questions. To ascertain professional perspectives on the clinical use of the dashboard, we have conducted 19 semi-structured qualitative interviews with head physicians, computer scientists, jurists, and ethicists. The application of a qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis enabled the detection of main ethical concerns, chances, and limitations. These ethical considerations were categorized: changes of the patient-physician relationship and the current social reality are expected, causing de-skilling and an active participation of the artificial intelligence. The interviewees anticipated a redistribution of human resources, time, knowledge, and experiences as well as expenses and financing. Concerns of privacy, accuracy, transparency, and explainability were stated, and an insufficient data basis, an intensifying of existing inequalities and systematic discrimination considering a fair access emphasized. Concluding, the patient-physician relationship, social reality, redistribution of resources, fair access, as well as data-related aspects of the artificial intelligence-based system could conflict with the ethical principles of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and social justice. To respond to these ethical concerns, a responsible use of the dashboard and a critical verification of therapy suggestions is mandatory, and the application limited by questions at the end of life and taking life-changing decisions.

Why do transgender individuals experience discrimination in healthcare and thereby limited access to healthcare? An interview study exploring the perspective of German transgender individuals.

BACKGROUND: Transgender individuals experience limited access to healthcare. This results not least from experiences of discrimination to which they are exposed in the health system. These contribute to transgender individuals having poorer health than cis individuals, i.e. individuals whose sex assigned at birth is in line with their gender identity. It is an ethical duty to take effective measures to minimize inequalities in medical care. At best, such measures should also be assessed as appropriate from the perspective of those affected in order to be accepted and thus effective. It is therefore important to know whether measures touch on the subjectively assumed reasons for experiences of discrimination. Hence, to be able to take appropriate measures, it is important to identify the reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination in healthcare. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 German transgender individuals and asked them about their own experiences of discrimination in healthcare and their assumptions on the reasons for discrimination. We analyzed the responses using the method of structured qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: 13 transgender individuals reported experiences of discrimination in healthcare. These emanated from different professional groups and took place in trans-specific as well as general medical settings. We were able to identify a total of 12 reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination: (1) internalized trans-hostility and "protection" of cis individuals, (2) lack of knowledge/uncertainties regarding transition, (3) "protection" of a binary worldview, (4) binary worldview in medicine, (5) structural deficits, (6) asymmetric interactions with specialists, (7) current political debate, (8) view of transgender individuals as a "burden for society", (9) objectification, (10) homophobia, (11) misogyny/androcentrism and (12) discrimination as reaction to discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: German transgender individuals have a very differentiated picture regarding their subjective reasons for experiencing discrimination in healthcare. Overall, disrespect regarding gender identity and a confrontation with foreignness seems to be seen as the decisive factor. Thus, it is not enough to focus only on measures that aim to remedy the information deficit on the part of medical providers. Measures must be taken that can create a granting and respectful attitude towards transgender individuals.

Diversity awareness, diversity competency and access to healthcare for minority groups: perspectives of healthcare professionals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia.

Introduction: Due to cultural, language, or legal barriers, members of social minority groups face challenges in access to healthcare. Equality of healthcare provision can be achieved through raised diversity awareness and diversity competency of healthcare professionals. The aim of this research was to explore the experiences and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward the issue of social diversity and equal access to healthcare in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia. Methods: The data reported come from semi-structured interviews with n = 39 healthcare professionals. The interviews were analyzed using the methods of content analysis and thematic analysis. Results: Respondents in all four countries acknowledged that socioeconomic factors and membership in a minority group have an impact on access to healthcare services, but its scope varies depending on the country. Underfunding of healthcare, language barriers, inadequate cultural training or lack of interpersonal competencies, and lack of institutional support were presented as major challenges in the provision of diversity-responsive healthcare. The majority of interviewees did not perceive direct systemic exclusion of minority groups; however, they reported cases of individual discrimination through the presence of homophobia or racism. Discussion: To improve the situation, systemic interventions are needed that encompass all levels of healthcare systems - from policies to addressing existing challenges at the healthcare facility level to improving the attitudes and skills of individual healthcare providers.

Restriction of Access to Healthcare and Discrimination of Individuals of Sexual and Gender Minority: An Analysis of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights from an Ethical Perspective.

Individuals of sexual and gender minority (SGM) form a vulnerable group with specific healthcare needs that might be prone to experience discrimination and restrictions regarding their access to healthcare. As the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) offer a normative perspective on these issues, we analyzed them systematically (1) to identify whether and in what manner ECtHR's judgments concern restriction of access to healthcare for SGM individuals and (2) to identify and categorize the ways of discrimination to which SGM individuals are exposed. We conducted a systematic search of the database of the ECtHR's judgments with the use of specified search terms. Descriptive statistics were performed on the identified judgments. Subsequently, we analyzed the judgments with the use of a qualitative method of thematic analysis. We identified n = 73 cases relevant for our study. In n = 7 (9.59%) of judgments, we found limitations of access to healthcare for SGM individuals, e.g., in cases of restrictions for transsexual individuals to receive hormone or surgical therapy. We regard this as a specific form of discrimination. Furthermore, we identified five other categories of discrimination: restriction of parental rights, failure to respect one's gender identity/sexual orientation, discrimination by jurisdiction, prohibition of promotion, and verbal/physical attacks. The ECtHR proves to have a balanced view on the sensitive topic of sexual self-determination condemning any form of discrimination or restriction of access to healthcare. However, there is a need for further research on discriminatory acts by other individuals, e.g., healthcare providers, rather than by public authorities.

Equal access to healthcare in national legislations: how do Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia counteract discrimination in healthcare?

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was a comparative analysis of legislative measures against discrimination in healthcare on the grounds of a) race and ethnicity, b) religion and belief, and c) gender identity and sexual orientation in Croatia, Germany, Poland and Slovenia. METHODS: We conducted a search for documents in national legal databases and reviewed legal commentaries, scientific literature and official reports of equality bodies. We integrated a comparative method with text analysis and the critical interpretive approach. The documents were examined in their original languages: Croatian, German, Polish, and Slovenian. RESULTS: All examined states prohibit discrimination and guarantee the right to healthcare on the constitutional level. However, there are significant differences among them on the statutory level, regarding both anti-discriminatory legal measures and other legislation affecting access to healthcare for groups of diverse race or ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity. Croatia and Slovenia show the most comprehensive legislation concerning non-discrimination in healthcare in comparison to Germany and even more Poland. Except for Slovenia, explicit provisions protecting equal access for members of the abovementioned groups are insufficiently represented in healthcare legislation. CONCLUSIONS: The study identified legislative barriers to access to healthcare for persons of diverse race or ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity in Croatia, Germany, Poland and Slovenia. The discrepancies in the level of implementation of anti-discriminatory measures among these states show that there is a need for comprehensive EU-wide regulations, which would implement the principle of equal treatment in the specific context of healthcare. General anti-discrimination regulations should be strengthened by inclusion of anti-discrimination provisions directly into national legislation relating specifically to the area of healthcare.

Access to healthcare for disabled individuals: An analysis of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights from an ethical perspective.

Introduction: Individuals with disabilities (ID) suffer from restricted access to healthcare. This contributes to their poorer health status and constitutes an ethical challenge. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to illustrate examples of restricted access to healthcare for ID. Methods: Through a search in the ECtHR's database we identified judgments dealing with access to healthcare for ID. The search resulted in n = 329 judgments, of which n = 55 were included in the analysis. A descriptive statistic was performed on Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights and violation of these articles. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to group the judgments in thematic categories. Results: Most applications were filed against Russia (n = 23), followed by Poland (n = 8) and Ukraine (n = 7). The youngest applicant was 18, the oldest 72 years old. An overwhelming majority of cases dealt with disabled prisoners. Most of the judgments involved Article 14 and Article 8. We identified seven partially overlapping categories representing thematic patterns in the analyzed judgments. Discussion: Any restriction of access to healthcare can be considered a violation of human rights. However, the results show a relatively low total number of judgments dealing with limited access to healthcare for ID. This could be a further confirmation of the fact that ID still experience too little attention in our societies. Especially in the context of detention, ID is restricted from receiving the healthcare they require. Indirect ways of a restricted access to healthcare should not be overseen.

Diversity Competency and Access to Healthcare in Hospitals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia.

Diversity competency is an approach for improving access to healthcare for members of minority groups. It includes a commitment to institutional policies and practices aimed at the improvement of the relationship between patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this research is to investigate whether and how such a commitment is included in internal documents of hospitals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia. Using the methods of documentary research and thematic analysis we examined internal documents received from hospitals in these countries. In all four countries, the documents concentrate on general statements prohibiting discrimination with regard to healthcare provision. Specific regulations concerning ethnicity and culture focus on the issue of language barriers. With regard to religious practices, the documents from Croatia, Poland, and Slovenia focus on dominant religious groups. Observance of other religious practices and customs is rarely addressed. Healthcare needs of patients with non-heteronormative sexual orientation, intersexual, and transgender patients are explicitly addressed in only a few internal documents. Diversity competency policies are not comprehensively implemented in hospital internal regulations in hospitals under investigation. There is a need for the development and implementation of comprehensive policies in hospitals aiming at the specific needs of minority groups.

Post-traumatic stress disorder, human rights and access to healthcare: an analysis of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights from an ethical perspective.

Background: Human rights violations such as torture are associated with a high risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The judgements of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) include a normative perspective on PTSD and address central ethical questions. Objective: To help bridge the gap between the psycho-medical and the legal discourse on human rights violations and to illustrate their medico-ethical implications by systematically assessing and categorizing all judgements by the ECtHR dealing with PTSD. Method: The ECtHR database was searched for 'post-traumatic stress disorder'. A descriptive statistic was performed on the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights involved and violations to these articles. In a qualitative analysis, the judgements were thematically grouped. Results: The search yielded n = 103 judgements, of which n = 90 were included. There were mostly violations of Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) and Article 6 (Right to a fair trial). PTSD in these judgements is normatively discussed with regards to ethical, social and political themes such as inadequate access to healthcare, especially in prison, matters of asylum, expulsion and extradition, protection of minorities and minors, as well as rights and duties of traumatized witnesses. Conclusion: PTSD plays a central role in a large number of ECtHR judgements. Our results show that PTSD as a medical diagnosis also encompasses legal, ethical, social, and political dimensions. This knowledge is essential for healthcare professionals working with traumatized persons, but can also be relevant for political decision-makers.

Antecedentes: las violaciones de derechos humanos como la tortura están asociadas con un alto riesgo de trastorno de estrés postraumático (TEPT). Las sentencias del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) incluyen una perspectiva normativa sobre el trastorno de estrés postraumático y abordan cuestiones éticas fundamentales.Objetivo: ayudar a cerrar la brecha entre el discurso psico-médico y legal sobre las violaciones de los derechos humanos e ilustrar sus implicaciones médico-éticas evaluando y categorizando sistemáticamente todas las sentencias del TEDH relacionados con el trastorno de estrés postraumático.Método: Se buscó en la base de datos del TEDH para 'trastorno por estrés postraumático'. Se realizó una estadística descriptiva sobre los artículos del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos involucrados y las violaciones a estos artículos. En un análisis cualitativo, las sentencias se agruparon temáticamente.Resultados: La búsqueda arrojó n = 103 sentencias, de las cuales se incluyeron n = 90. En su mayoría fueron violaciones del artículo 3 (prohibición de la tortura), artículo 8 (derecho al respeto de la vida privada y familiar) y artículo 6 (derecho a un juicio justo). El TEPT en estas sentencias se discute normativamente con respecto a temas éticos, sociales y políticos como el acceso inadecuado a la atención médica, especialmente en prisión, asuntos de asilo, expulsión y extradición, protección de minorías y menores, así como derechos y deberes de testigos traumatizados.Conclusión: TEPT juega un papel central en un gran número de sentencias del TEDH. Nuestros resultados muestran que el TEPT como diagnóstico médico también abarca dimensiones legales, éticas, sociales y políticas. Este conocimiento es esencial para que los profesionales sanitarios trabajen con personas traumatizadas, pero también puede ser relevante para los responsables de la toma de decisiones políticas.

Social diversity and access to healthcare in Europe: how does European Union's legislation prevent from discrimination in healthcare?

BACKGROUND: Social diversity can affect healthcare outcomes in situations when access to healthcare is limited for specific groups. Although the principle of equality is one of the central topics on the agenda of the European Union (EU), its scope in the field of healthcare, however, is relatively unexplored. The aim of this study is to identify and systematically analyze primary and secondary legislation of the EU Institutions that concern the issue of access to healthcare for various minority groups. In our research, we have concentrated on three features of diversity: a) gender identity and sexual orientation, b) race and ethnicity, and c) religion or belief. METHOD AND MATERIALS: For the purpose of this analysis, we conducted a search of database Eur-Lex, the official website of European Union law and other public documents of the European Union, based on specific keywords accompanied by review of secondary literature. Relevant documents were examined with regard to the research topic. Our search covered documents that were in force between 13 December 2007 and 31 July 2019. RESULTS: Generally, the EU legal system prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, racial or ethnic origin, sex, and sexual orientation. However, with regard to the issue of non-discrimination in access to healthcare EU secondary law provides protection against discrimination only on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin and sex. The issue of discrimination in healthcare on the grounds of religion or belief, gender identity and sexual orientation is not specifically addressed under EU secondary law. DISCUSSION: The absence of regulations regarding non-discrimination in the EU secondary law in the area of healthcare may result from the division of competences between the European Union and the Member States. Reluctance of the Member States to adopt comprehensive antidiscrimination regulations leads to a situation, in which protection in access to healthcare primarily depends on national regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that EU antidiscriminatory law with regard to access to healthcare is fragmentary. Prohibition of discrimination of the level of European binding law does not fully encompass all aspects of social diversity.

Ethical Challenges With Smartwatch-Based Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: Putting Users at Risk for Marketing Purposes?

Background: Atrial fibrillation is the most common persistent arrhythmia. It is associated with increased mortality and morbidity such as stroke. The early detection of atrial fibrillation can significantly reduce the risk of stroke through preventive anticoagulation. Smartwatches offer the opportunity to screen for atrial fibrillation in the general population. This paper aims to analyze the ethical challenges associated with screening for atrial fibrillation using smartwatches. Methods: This is an ethical analysis. The methodology is based on the principle-orientated approach of Beauchamp and Childress. The principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy have to be guaranteed given the influence of private companies, privacy protection, liability and doctor-patient-relationship. The work is based on a systematic literature research. Results: There is currently no evidence that screening for atrial fibrillation with smartwatches improves the outcome and reduces the number of adverse events. The high number of false-positive results can lead to harm. The principle of non-maleficence is violated. The over-reliance on and the lack of adequate education by smartwatches can worsen the doctor-patient relationship. However, the relationship can also be improved by the proactive participation of the patient, which leads to greater autonomy, compliance and in the end beneficence. Since smartwatches are consumer goods, there is a risk for greater disparities in the poor and rich population. There is also a risk of discrimination against ethnic minorities due to underrepresentation in training data and study cohorts. The principle of justice is violated. The storage of sensitive medical data by private companies also raises many ethical and legal concerns. Conclusion: This analysis has shown that the use of smartwatches to detect atrial fibrillation is currently in an ethical perspective problematic. The lack of evidence and the high number of false-positive results can lead to harm. As smartwatches provide only little information about the possible consequences, informed consent cannot be assumed. Ethical implementation could be archived if doctors provide smartwatches to patients who have been shown to benefit from them. The implementation and education should be managed by the doctor.

A burden from birth? Non-invasive prenatal testing and the stigmatization of people with disabilities.

The notion of being a burden to others is mostly discussed in the context of care-intensive diseases or end-of-life decisions. But the notion is also crucial in decision-making at the beginning of life, namely regarding prenatal testing. Ever more sophisticated testing methods, especially non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), allow the detection of genetic traits in the unborn child that may cause disabilities. A positive result often influences the decision of the pregnant women towards a termination of the pregnancy. Thus, critics claim that these testing methods send a negative message to people with disabilities. At the core of this is what we call the burden assumption. This assumption claims that children with disabilities are necessarily a burden to others, especially to their parents and other family members. In this paper, we discuss what being a burden to others means in this context and how such an attitude can be avoided without restraining reproductive autonomy. A closer examination shows that the burden assumption is mostly based on misinformation and a false model of disability. Empirical studies as well as narrative evidence from parents who raise a child with disabilities show that the burden assumption is wrong. Raising a child with disabilities does not necessarily mean a decrease in the quality of life. We show how the burden assumption can be challenged through an advanced genetic counselling that combines empirical evidence with narratives from a first-person perspective.