Guiding Ethical Decisions in Cochlear Implantation for the Hearing Impaired with Comorbid Psychosis.

AbstractCochlear implants can restore hearing in people with severe hearing loss and have a significant impact on communication, social integration, self-esteem, and quality of life. However, whether and how much clinical benefit is derived from cochlear implants varies significantly by patient and is influenced by the etiology and extent of hearing loss, medical comorbidities, and preexisting behavioral and psychosocial issues. In patients with underlying psychosis, concerns have been raised that the introduction of auditory stimuli could trigger hallucinations, worsen existing delusions, or exacerbate erratic behavior. This concern has made psychosis a relative contraindication to cochlear implant surgery. This is problematic because there is a lack of data describing this phenomenon and because the psychosocial benefits derived from improvement in auditory function may be a critical intervention for treating psychosis in some patients. The objective of this report is to provide an ethical framework for guiding clinical decision-making on cochlear implant surgery in the hearing impaired with psychosis.

Contribution of ethical reasoning learning sessions on medical training.

INTRODUCTION: Ethical reasoning is an important skill for all physicians who often face complex ethical dilemmas in their daily practice. Therefore, medical training should include methods for learning ethical theories and concepts, as well as how to apply them in practical situations. AIM: Assess the contribution of an Ethical Reasoning Learning session to fifth medical students' training through a comparison of results of the same objective and structured clinical examination (OSCE) in the form of simulated interview before and after sessions. METHODS: Four 45- minutes' sessions of Ethical Reasoning Learning (ERL) were implemented during a psychiatry internship for four groups of 5th-year students of the faculty of medicine of Monastir (Tunisia). Each session was divided into 7 parts: introduction, reading of a clinical vignette, brainstorming concerning the problems posed by this clinical situation, classification of the problems, identification of the principles of medical ethics, construction of the ethical matrix, and a conclusion. RESULTS: Fifty-seven students participated in the study divided into 4 groups. We found a significant difference in the means of the OSCE scores before and after the ERL session and a significant difference between the probability of respecting medical secrecy during pre and post-ethical reasoning learning sessions (p <0.001). We have found an effect of ERL sessions on the acquisition of this ethical competence by medical students. CONCLUSION: We learned that an ERL session has improved medical training in ethics applied to psychiatry. Other sessions dealing with other ethical skills are necessary to confirm these results.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the ethics in medical research among Moroccan interns and resident physicians.

BACKGROUND: In Morocco, medical research ethics training was integrated into the medical curriculum during the 2015 reform. In the same year, a law on medical research ethics was enacted to protect individuals participating in medical research. These improvements, whether in the reform or in the enactment of the law, could positively impact the knowledge of these researchers and, consequently, their attitudes and practices regarding medical research ethics. The main objective of this work is to assess Moroccan physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices at the beginning of their careers (interns and residents) in medical research ethics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted in 2021 among Moroccan physicians. Three scores were created and validated to assess physicians' level of knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding research ethics. A descriptive analysis was carried out, followed by a univariate analysis and a multivariate analysis using multivariate binary logistic regression to study the factors associated with the different calculated scores. RESULTS: A total of 924 physicians were included in the study, with an average age of 27.8 ± 2.2 years. 40.7% had a high medical research ethics knowledge score, and 68.8% had good attitudes. These two scores were positively associated with age and were statistically higher in residents and in physicians who had received training in medical research ethics during their medical curriculum. Only 29,9% of physicians who had participated in research studies had adequate practices with medical research ethics. This score was statistically higher in residents and in physicians who had heard about research ethics. CONCLUSION: A genuine introduction to ethics in the medical curriculum is essential to enhance researchers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices. This, in turn, can lead to an increase in both the quantity and quality of research conducted in Morocco.

Development of a Medical Social Media Ethics Scale and Assessment of #IRad, #CardioTwitter, and #MedTwitter Posts: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Social media posts by clinicians are not bound by the same rules as peer-reviewed publications, raising ethical concerns that have not been extensively characterized or quantified. OBJECTIVE: We aim to develop a scale to assess ethical issues on medical social media (SoMe) and use it to determine the prevalence of these issues among posts with 3 different hashtags: #MedTwitter, #IRad, and #CardioTwitter. METHODS: A scale was developed based on previous descriptions of professionalism and validated via semistructured cognitive interviewing with a sample of 11 clinicians and trainees, interrater agreement, and correlation of 100 posts. The final scale assessed social media posts in 6 domains. This was used to analyze 1500 Twitter posts, 500 each from the 3 hashtags. Analysis of posts was limited to original Twitter posts in English made by health care professionals in North America. The prevalence of potential issues was determined using descriptive statistics and compared across hashtags using the Fisher exact and χ2 tests with Yates correction. RESULTS: The final scale was considered reflective of potential ethical issues of SoMe by participants. There was good interrater agreement (Cohen κ=0.620, P<.01) and moderate to strong positive interrater correlation (=0.602, P<.001). The 6 scale domains showed minimal to no interrelation (Cronbach α=0.206). Ethical concerns across all hashtags had a prevalence of 1.5% or less except the conflict of interest concerns on #IRad, which had a prevalence of 3.6% (n=18). Compared to #MedTwitter, posts with specialty-specific hashtags had more patient privacy and conflict of interest concerns. CONCLUSIONS: The SoMe professionalism scale we developed reliably reflects potential ethical issues. Ethical issues on SoMe are rare but important and vary in prevalence across medical communities.

Ethical and Professional Issues Encountered by Fourth-Year Medical Students during a Critical Care Clerkship before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe ethical and professional issues encountered and the ethical and professional values cited by medical students during their critical care clerkship, with a comparison of issues encountered before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective mixed-methods study, two investigators at a midwestern US academic medical center performed qualitative content analysis on reflections written by fourth-year medical students about ethical and professional issues encountered during their critical care rotations between March 2016 and September 2021. We also analyzed the ethical/professional values mentioned in their reflections. Descriptive and inferential (χ2) statistics were performed to examine differences in issues and values cited before and during the pandemic. RESULTS: Respondents highlighted several key themes identified in prior studies, including decision making (64.1%), communication between clinicians and families (52.2%), and justice-related issues (32.1%), as well as interdisciplinary communication (25.7%) and issues related to the role of students in the intensive care unit (6.1%). Six novel subthemes were identified in this group, predominantly related to resource availability and end-of-life care. Of 343 reflections, 69% were written before the pandemic. Analysis of ethical and professional issues before and during COVID were notable for several significant differences, including increased discussion of inadequate tools/supplies/equipment (1.3% before vs 17.6% during, P = 0.005) and/or access to care (3.9% before vs 17.6% during, P = 0.03) and increased concerns about the tension between law and ethics (21.2% before vs 41.2% during, P = 0.028). Primacy of patient welfare (49.8% before vs 47.2% during, P = 0.659) and patient autonomy (51.1% before vs 38.9% during, P = 0.036) were the most commonly cited ethical principles in both time frames, often discussed concurrently and in tension. CONCLUSIONS: Although the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased reflection by medical students about resources in the intensive care unit, their perception of ethical issues arising in critical illness remained largely focused on enduring challenges in shared decision-making. These findings should be considered when developing ethics curricula for critical care rotations.

Balance and Change in Forensic Psychiatry.

The practice of forensic psychiatry requires balance; the forensic psychiatrist encounters the need for balance routinely and in a variety of areas. Balance is necessary for sound judgment and objectivity when striving for excellence in the field. It is also necessary to effectively balance a career in forensic psychiatry with one's personal life. The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL) has stressed the virtue of balance in the preamble of its ethics guidelines, noting the importance of balancing competing obligations to the individual and society. Keeping in mind the importance of balance will assist forensic psychiatry with the many challenges of a postinternet era, such as rapidly changing technology, culture, and society. A substantial challenge for forensic psychiatry, now and in the future, involves data overflow and the so-called big data explosion. Information now flows too fast and in such vast amounts that a single individual can no longer keep pace. Balance may be pursued by adapting and leveraging certain skills to confront these challenges more effectively. The current inflection point of rapid technological, social, and cultural change, stresses the importance of balance through teamwork, technology, and prioritizing civil discourse.

Clarifying Human Dignity in Forensic Practice.

The notion of human dignity remains a relatively complex concept that has roots in classical Greek and Roman antiquity and links to religious teachings and Kantian philosophical notions. From the Latin dignitas, human dignity means worth and implies excellence and distinction. Human dignity, also found in 20th century constitutions and international declarations, has been considered in bioethics, general medicine, and psychiatry. The application of dignity to forensic psychiatry practice has received less attention. Through a review of texts in medicine and related fields, such as philosophy and anthropology, we aim to clarify the concept of human dignity and its application in forensic psychiatry practice. We first outline the historical origins of the term. We then consider several varieties of human dignity applied in medical ethics and psychiatry. We review individuals' lived experiences of indignity and dignity's place in forensic practice in different loci. We present recent scholarship related to human dignity and highlight the importance of dignity in forensic practice. Focusing on dignity in evaluator-evaluee and doctor-patient relationships should improve forensic work. Training in dignity-imbued forensic practice should remind us of the human dimensions of those we serve in the forensic arena.

Conscientious refusal or conscientious provision: We can't have both.

Some authors argue that it is permissible for clinicians to conscientiously provide abortion services because clinicians are already allowed to conscientiously refuse to provide certain services. Call this the symmetry thesis. We argue that on either of the two main understandings of the aim of the medical profession-what we will call "pathocentric" and "interest-centric" views-conscientious refusal and conscientious provision are mutually exclusive. On pathocentric views, refusing to provide a service that takes away from a patient's health is professionally justified because there are compelling reasons, based on professional standards, to refuse to provide that service (e.g., it does not heal, and it is contrary to the goals of medicine). However, providing that same service is not professionally justified when providing that service would be contrary to the goals of medicine. Likewise, the thesis turns out false on interest-centric views. Refusing to provide a service is not professionally justified when that service helps the patient fulfill her autonomous preferences because there are compelling reasons, based on professional standards, to provide that service (e.g., it helps her achieve her autonomous preferences, and it would be contrary to the goals of medicine to deny her that service). However, refusing to provide that same service is not professionally justified when refusing to provide that service would be contrary to the goals of medicine. As a result, on either of the two most plausible views on the goals of medicine, the symmetry thesis turns out false.