A Heresy of No Consequence: Duties and Virtues in Medicine and Professionalism.

In The Trusted Doctor: Medical Ethics and Professionalism (2020), Rosamond Rhodes presents a new theory of medical ethics based on 16 duties she considers central to medical ethics and professionalism. She asserts that her theory is "bioethical heresy," as it contradicts established "principlism" and "common morality" approaches to ethics in medicine. Rhodes advocates the development of parallelism between clinical and ethical decision-making and a systematic approach that emphasizes duties over principles and rules to facilitate the development of a "doctorly character" among medical decision-makers. Rhodes further asserts that her theory and approach necessitate the cultivation of virtues contained in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. But Rhodes's insistence that "medical professionals," not just doctors, are covered by her theory is open to critique, as is her conflation of ethic and morals, especially around the question of the "doctorly character" upon which her duty-based theory hinges. This assessment argues that applicants to medical schools and allied health training programs be screened for specific virtues-honesty, diligence, curiosity, and compassion-to facilitate reinforcement of these pre-professionalized inclinations throughout the habituation processes of medical training. This would increase the probability of turning fear and hope to cure and care via reasoning and affective models performed within an ethical medical framework-even while what this ethical framework should reference remains under debate.

Postdischarge Nausea and Vomiting Remains Frequent After Le Fort I Osteotomy Despite Implementation of a Multimodal Antiemetic Protocol Effective in Reducing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting.

PURPOSE: To assess the prevalence of postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) after Le Fort I osteotomy with and without the use of a multimodal antiemetic protocol shown to decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy with or without additional procedures at a single academic institution formed the intervention cohort for an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical trial with a retrospective comparison group. The intervention cohort was managed with a multimodal antiemetic protocol. The comparison group consisted of consecutive patients who underwent similar surgical procedures at the same institution before protocol implementation. All patients were asked to complete a postdischarge diary documenting the occurrence of nausea and vomiting. Those who completed the diaries were included in this analysis. Data were analyzed with the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. A P value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Diaries were completed by 85% of patients in the intervention group (79 of 93) and 75% of patients in the comparison group (103 of 137). Patients in the intervention (n = 79) and comparison (n = 103) groups were similar in the proportion of patients with validated risk factors for PDNV, including female gender, history of PONV, age younger than 50 years, opioid use in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and nausea in the PACU (P = .37). The prevalence of PDNV was unaffected by the antiemetic protocol. After discharge, nausea was reported by 72% of patients in the intervention group and 60% of patients in the comparison group (P = .13) and vomiting was reported by 22% of patients in the intervention group and 29% of patients in the comparison group (P = .40). CONCLUSION: Modalities that successfully address PONV after Le Fort I osteotomy might fail to affect PDNV, which is prevalent in this population. Future investigation will focus on methods to minimize PDNV.

Multimodal protocol reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of a multimodal antiemetic protocol on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after Le Fort I osteotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy with or without additional procedures at a single academic institution were recruited as the intervention cohort for an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical trial with a retrospective comparison group. The intervention cohort was managed with a multimodal antiemetic protocol, including total intravenous anesthesia; prophylactic ondansetron, steroids, scopolamine, and droperidol; gastric decompression at surgery end; opioid-sparing analgesia; avoidance of morphine and codeine; prokinetic erythromycin; and fluids at a minimum of 25 mL/kg. The comparison group consisted of consecutive patients from a larger study who underwent similar surgical procedures before protocol implementation. Data, including occurrence of PONV, were extracted from medical records. Data were analyzed in bivariate fashion with the Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Logistic regression was used to compare the likelihood of nausea and vomiting in the 2 cohorts after controlling for demographic and surgical characteristics. A P value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The intervention (n = 93) and comparison (n = 137) groups were similar in gender (58% and 65% female patients; P = .29), race (72% and 71% Caucasian; P = .85), age (median, 19 and 20 years old; P = .75), proportion of patients with known risk factors for PONV (P = .34), percentage undergoing bimaxillary surgery (60% for the 2 groups), and percentage for whom surgery time was longer than 180 minutes (63% and 59%; P = .51). Prevalence of postoperative nausea was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the comparison group (24% vs 70%; P < .0001). Prevalence of postoperative vomiting was likewise significantly lower in the intervention group (11% vs 28%; P = .0013). The likelihood that patients in the comparison group would develop nausea was 8.9 and that for vomiting was 3.7 times higher than in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: This multimodal protocol was associated with substantially decreased prevalence of PONV in patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy.

Tracheal extubation of deeply anesthetized pediatric patients: a comparison of desflurane and sevoflurane.

UNLABELLED: In this study, we examined the emergence characteristics of children tracheally extubated while deeply anesthetized with desflurane (Group D) or sevoflurane (Group S). Forty-eight children were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. At the end of the operation, all subjects were tracheally extubated while breathing 1.5 times the minimal effective concentration of assigned inhaled anesthetic. Recovery characteristics and complications were noted. Group D patients had higher arousal scores on arrival to the postanesthesia care unit than Group S patients. Later arousal scores were not significantly different. No serious complications occurred in either group. Coughing episodes and the overall incidence of complications after extubation were more frequent in Group D. Readiness for discharge and actual time to discharge were not significantly different between groups. Emergence agitation was common in both groups (33% overall, 46% for Group D, and 21% for Group S). Narcotic administration in the postanesthesia care unit occurred more frequently in Group D (10 of 24 patients) versus Group S (3 of 24 patients). Premedication with oral midazolam resulted in significantly longer emergence times regardless of the potent inhaled anesthetic administered. IMPLICATIONS: Deep extubation of children can be performed safely with desflurane or sevoflurane. Airway problems occur more frequently with desflurane. Awakening occurs more quickly with desflurane. Midazolam premedication has a greater effect on emergence times than does the choice of inhaled anesthetic. Emergence agitation occurs frequently with either technique.

Communication with patients before anesthesia and obtention of preanesthetic consent.

Communication in medicine deserves greater attention than it usually receives. The physician's obligation to obtain informed consent for clinical care and research forces the issue out into the open. Recognition that communication can have legal and economic impacts suggests communication skills should be cultivated as a medical art. This review places communication issues in anesthesia practice, especially those related to informed consent, in an historical, and when possible, scientific context.