Reflective Debriefs as a Response to Moral Distress: Two Case Study Examples.

Within this paper, we discuss Moral Distress Reflective Debriefs as a promising approach to address and mitigate moral distress experienced by healthcare professionals. We briefly review the empirical and theoretical literature on critical incident stress debriefing and psychological debriefing to highlight the potential benefits of this modality. We then describe the approach that we take to facilitating reflective group discussions in response to morally distressing patient cases ("Moral Distress Reflective Debriefs"). We discuss how the debriefing literature and other clinical ethics activities influenced the development of our approach. In particular, we focus on the role of the clinical ethicist as a facilitator with particular emphasis on encouraging perspective-taking and nurturing ethical attunement in a supportive manner. We suggest that this approach reduces the narrowing effects of frustration and anger that are often reported when individuals experience moral-constraint distress. Finally, we provide an example of Moral Distress Reflective Debriefs, elucidating how this supportive process complements ethics consultation and can mitigate the negative effects of moral distress.

Interventions to mitigate moral distress: A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress is a pervasive phenomenon that can negatively impact healthcare professionals and has been well studied in nursing populations. Much of the evidence suggests that it is associated with intention to leave high acuity areas and the profession. Despite the increasing amounts of research to explore the causes and effects of moral distress, there is limited research on interventions that mitigate the negative effects of moral distress. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this systematic review were to: (a) identify and examine interventions developed to address moral distress experienced by health care professionals (b) examine the quality of the research methods and (c) report on the efficacy of these interventions. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of interventional studies developed to mitigate moral distress. DATA SOURCE: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane were searched for relevant studies (July 2019- September 2019). Additional bioethics databases and reference lists were also hand-searched. REVIEW METHODS: The first author reviewed all retrieved titles and abstracts with a low tolerance for borderline papers based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and those papers were reviewed and discussed by all authors to determine inclusion. Quality appraisal was conducted on the included studies using narrative synthesis to compare the findings. Data were extracted and compared by all authors and then reviewed by the first author for consistency. RESULTS: Sixteen papers were included for full text review and the following interventions identified: educational interventions of varying length and breadth; facilitated discussions ranging from 30 to 60 minutes; specialist consultation services; an intervention bundle; multidisciplinary rounds; self-reflection and narrative writing. Researchers reported statistically significant reductions in moral distress using pre and post surveys, including one mixed methods program evaluation (n=7). The qualitative program evaluation provided participant quotations to suggest their program was beneficial. There were no statistically significant findings in the other studies (n=8). All studies had limitations in design and methodology presenting significant threats to validity. CONCLUSION: Designing rigorous research studies that measure the impact of interventions aimed at mitigating moral distress continues to be challenging. The primary reason being that moral distress is a subjective ethical phenomenon with a number of different causes and effects. This calls for interventions that are flexible and sensitive to individual's needs. To build an evidence-base, interventions should also be measurable and research methods need to be scientifically rigorous. To achieve rigor and innovation, researchers should clearly justify their methodological choices. Tweetable abstract: Interventions to mitigate moral distress: a systematic review of the literature. Educational interventions offer a promising direction but more research is needed.

Incorporating Stakeholder Perspectives on Scarce Resource Allocation: Lessons Learned from Policymaking in a Time of Crisis.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis provoked an organizational ethics dilemma: how to develop ethical pandemic policy while upholding our organizational mission to deliver relationship- and patient-centered care. Tasked with producing a recommendation about whether healthcare workers and essential personnel should receive priority access to limited medical resources during the pandemic, the bioethics department and survey and interview methodologists at our institution implemented a deliberative approach that included the perspectives of healthcare professionals and patient stakeholders in the policy development process. Involving the community more, not less, during a crisis required balancing the need to act quickly to garner stakeholder perspectives, uncertainty about the extent and duration of the pandemic, and disagreement among ethicists about the most ethically supportable way to allocate scarce resources. This article explains the process undertaken to garner stakeholder input as it relates to organizational ethics, recounts the stakeholder perspectives shared and how they informed the triage policy developed, and offers suggestions for how other organizations may integrate stakeholder involvement in ethical decision-making as well as directions for future research and public health work.

Addressing caregiver moral distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moral distress is the psychological distress that is experienced in relation to a morally challenging situation or event. Although it was first observed within nursing, caregivers across all disciplines-including physicians, respiratory therapists, social workers and chaplains-experience moral distress. In this consult, we discuss 5 types of moral distress using examples of changes to clinical practice that have occurred due to COVID-19. We also provide suggestions for responding to moral distress and outline the resources available at Cleveland Clinic.

A Call for Empirical Research on Uterine Transplantation and Reproductive Autonomy.

Uterine transplantation could give women who suffer from uterine factor infertility the possibility of experiencing gestation. Much of the ethical discussion about uterine transplantation has focused on whether research on it should even be pursued, but researchers are nevertheless moving forward with several uterine transplant research protocols. Scholars should therefore already be identifying and engaging in an intimate examination of the ethical realities of offering uterine transplantation in a clinical setting. Given the potential for the procedure to expand reproductive options for women, reproductive autonomy has been a primary principle underlying much of the ethical discourse about the hypothetical impact of uterine transplantation. Yet the factors that will affect whether uterine transplants promote or undermine a patients' reproductive autonomy if the procedure is integrated into clinical practice have yet to be rigorously explored. Focusing on the clinical realities of patient autonomy, I argue that empirical data exploring prospective recipients' motivations and their perceptions of the benefits of the procedure in the context of their lived experiences are critical to a robust analysis of the ethical dimensions of uterine transplantation.