Evaluating the use of casuistry during moral case deliberation in the ICU: A multiple qualitative case study.

Intensive care unit (ICU) professionals engage in ethical decision making under conditions of high stakes, great uncertainty, time-sensitivity and frequent irreversibility of action. Casuistry is a way by which actionable knowledge is obtained through comparing a patient case to previous cases from experience in clinical practice. However, within the field of study as well as in practice, evidence-based medicine is the dominant epistemic framework. This multiple case study evaluated the use of casuistic reasoning by intensive care unit (ICU) professionals during moral case deliberation. It took place in two Dutch hospitals between June 2020 and June 2022. Twentyfive moral case deliberations from ICU practice were recorded and analyzed using discourse analysis. Additionally, 47 interviews were held with ICU professionals who participated in these deliberations, analyzed using thematic analysis. We found that ICU professionals made considerable use of case comparisons when discussing continuation, withdrawal or limitation. Analogies played a role in justifying or complicating moral judgements, and also played a role in addressing moral distress. The language of case-based arguments is most often not overtly normative. Rather, the data shows that casuistic reasoning deals with the medical, ethical and contextual elements of decisions in an integrated manner. Facilitators of MCD have an essential role in (supporting ICU professionals in) scrutinizing casuistic arguments. The data shows that during MCD, actual reasoning often deviated from principle- and rule-based reasoning which ICU professionals preferred themselves. Evidence-based arguments often gained the character of analogical arguments, especially when a patient-at-hand was seen as highly unique from the average patients in the literature. Casuistic arguments disguised as evidence-based arguments may therefore provide ICU professionals with a false sense of certainty. Within education, we should strive to train clinicians and ethics facilitators so that they can recognize and evaluate casuistic arguments.

Effect of Structural Moral Case Deliberation on Burnout Symptoms, Moral Distress, and Team Climate in ICU Professionals: A Parallel Cluster Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Moral case deliberation (MCD) is a team-based and facilitator-led, structured moral dialogue about ethical difficulties encountered in practice. This study assessed whether offering structural MCD in ICUs reduces burnout symptoms and moral distress and strengthens the team climate among ICU professionals. DESIGN: This is a parallel cluster randomized trial. SETTING: Six ICUs in two hospitals located in Nijmegen, between January 2020 and September 2021. SUBJECTS: Four hundred thirty-five ICU professionals. INTERVENTIONS: Three of the ICUs organized structural MCD. In three other units, there was no structural MCD or other structural discussions of moral problems. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcomes investigated were the three burnout symptoms-emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a low sense of personal accomplishment-among ICU professionals measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory on a 0-6 scale. Secondary outcomes were moral distress (Moral Distress Scale) on a 0-336 scale and team climate (Safety Attitude Questionnaire) on a 0-4 scale. Organizational culture was an explorative outcome (culture of care barometer) and was measured on a 0-4 scale. Outcomes were measured at baseline and in 6-, 12-, and 21-month follow-ups. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted using linear mixed models for longitudinal nested data. Structural MCD did not affect emotional exhaustion or depersonalization, or the team climate. It reduced professionals' personal accomplishment (-0.15; p < 0.05) but also reduced moral distress (-5.48; p < 0.01). Perceptions of organizational support (0.15; p < 0.01), leadership (0.19; p < 0.001), and participation opportunities (0.13; p < 0.05) improved. CONCLUSIONS: Although structural MCD did not mitigate emotional exhaustion or depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment in ICU professionals, it did reduce moral distress. Moreover, it did not improve team climate, but improved the organizational culture.

Development of Moral Injury in ICU Professionals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Serial Interview Study.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ICU professionals have faced moral problems that may cause moral injury. This study explored whether, how, and when moral injury among ICU professionals developed in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: This is a prospective qualitative serial interview study. SETTING: Two hospitals among which one university medical center and one teaching hospital in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Twenty-six ICU professionals who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS MAIN RESULTS: In-depth interviews with follow-up after 6 and 12 months. In total, 62 interviews were conducted. ICU professionals narrated about anticipatory worry about life and death decisions, lack of knowledge and prognostic uncertainty about COVID-19, powerlessness and failure, abandonment or betrayal by society, politics, or the healthcare organization, numbness toward patients and families, and disorientation and self-alienation. Centrally, ICU professionals describe longitudinal processes by which they gradually numbed themselves emotionally from patients and families as well as potentially impactful events in their work. For some ICU professionals, organizational, societal, and political responses to the pandemic contributed to numbness, loss of motivation, and self-alienation. CONCLUSIONS: ICU professionals exhibit symptoms of moral injury such as feelings of betrayal, detachment, self-alienation, and disorientation. Healthcare organizations and ICU professionals themselves should be cognizant that these feelings may indicate that professionals might have developed moral injury or that it may yet develop in the future. Awareness should be raised about moral injury and should be followed up by asking morally injured professionals what they need, so as to not risk offering unwanted help.

Complex interplay between moral distress and other risk factors of burnout in ICU professionals: findings from a cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Burnout threatens intensive care unit (ICU) professionals' capacity to provide high-quality care. Moral distress is previously considered a root cause of burnout, but there are other risk factors of burnout such as personality, work-life balance and culture. This study aimed to disentangle the associations of ICU professionals' moral distress and other risk factors with the components of burnout-emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and personal accomplishment-suggesting informed burnout prevention strategies. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey completed in 2019 of ICU professionals in two Dutch hospitals. The survey included validated measure for burnout (the Dutch Maslach Burnout Inventory), moral distress (Moral Distress Scale), personality (short Big Five Inventory), work-home balance (Survey Work-Home Interaction Nijmegen) and organisational culture (Culture of Care Barometer). Each of the three components of burnout was analysed as a separate outcome, and for each of the components, a separate regression analysis was carried out. RESULTS: 251 ICU professionals responded to the survey (response rate: 53.3%). Burnout prevalence was 22.7%. Findings showed that moral distress was associated with emotional exhaustion (ß=0.18, 95% CI 0.9 to 0.26) and depersonalisation (ß=0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.28) and with increased emotional exhaustion mediated by negative work-to-home spillover (ß=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.13). Support from direct supervisors mitigates the association between moral distress and emotional exhaustion (ß=0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding moral distress as a root cause of burnout is too simplified. There is an important interplay between moral distress and work-home imbalance. Interventions that support individual coping with moral distress and a work-home imbalance, and the support of direct supervisors, are paramount to prevent burnout in physicians and nurses.

Morisprudence: a theoretical framework for studying the relationship linking moral case deliberation, organisational learning and quality improvement.

There is a claim that clinical ethics support services (CESS) improve healthcare quality within healthcare organisations. However, there is lack of strong evidence supporting this claim. Rather, the current focus is on the quality of CESS themselves or on individual learning outcomes. In response, this article proposes a theoretical framework leading to empirical hypotheses that describe the relationship between a specific type of CESS, moral case deliberation and the quality of care at the organisational level. We combine insights from the literature on CESS, organisational learning and quality improvement and argue that moral case deliberation causes healthcare professionals to acquire practical wisdom. At the organisational level, where improving quality is a continuous and collective endeavour, this practical wisdom can be aggregated into morisprudence, which is an ongoing formulation of moral judgements across cases encountered within the organisation. Focusing on the development of morisprudence enables refined scrutinisation of CESS-related quality claims.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Immediately Increases Burnout Symptoms in ICU Professionals: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: ICU professionals are at risk of developing burnout due to coronavirus disease 2019. This study assesses the prevalence and incidence of burnout symptoms and moral distress in ICU professionals before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis. DESIGN: This is a longitudinal open cohort study. SETTING: Five ICUs based in a single university medical center plus another adult ICU based on a separate teaching hospital in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: All ICU professionals were sent a baseline survey in October-December 2019 (252 respondents, response rate: 53%), and a follow-up survey was sent in May-June 2020 (233 respondents, response rate: 50%). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Burnout symptoms and moral distress measured with the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the Moral Distress Scale, respectively. The prevalence of burnout symptoms was 23.0% before coronavirus disease 2019 and 36.1% at postpeak time, with higher rates in nurses (38.0%) than in physicians (28.6%). Reversely, the incidence rate of new burnout cases among physicians was higher (26.7%) than nurses (21.9%). Higher prevalence of burnout symptoms was observed in the postpeak coronavirus disease 2019 period (odds ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.32-2.53), for nurses (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.03-3.04), for professionals working overtime (odds ratio 2.11; 95% CI, 1.48-3.02), and for professionals directly engaged with care for coronavirus disease 2019 patients (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.35-2.60). Physicians were more likely than nurses to develop burnout symptoms due to coronavirus disease 2019 (odds ratio, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.06-12.21). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that overburdening of ICU professionals during an extended period of time leads to symptoms of burnout. Working long hours and under conditions of scarcity of staff, time, and resources comes at the price of ICU professionals' mental health.