Challenges of a simplified opt-out consent process in a neonatal randomised controlled trial: qualitative study of parents' and health professionals' views and experiences.

BACKGROUND: More effective recruitment strategies like alternative approaches to consent are needed to facilitate adequately powered trials. Witholding Enteral feeds Around Transfusion was a multicentre, randomised, pilot trial that compared withholding and continuing feeds around transfusion. The primary clinical outcome was necrotising enterocolitis. The trial used simplified opt-out consent with concise parent information and no consent form. OBJECTIVE: To explore the views and experiences of parents and health professionals on the acceptability and feasibility of opt-out consent in randomised comparative effectiveness trials. METHODS: A qualitative, descriptive interview-based study nested within a randomised trial. Semistructured interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. SETTING: Eleven neonatal units in England. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven parents and ten health professionals with experience of simplified consent. RESULTS: Five themes emerged: 'opt-out consent operationalised as verbal opt-in consent', 'opt-out consent normalises participation while preserving parental choice', 'opt-out consent as an ongoing process of informed choice', 'consent without a consent form' and 'choosing to opt out of a comparative effectiveness trial', with two subthemes: 'wanting "normal care"' and 'a belief that feeding is better'. CONCLUSION: Introducing a novel form of consent proved challenging in practice. The principle of a simplified, opt-out approach to consent was generally considered feasible and acceptable by health professionals for a neonatal comparative effectiveness trial. The priority for parents was having the right to decide about trial participation, and they did not see opt-out consent as undermining this. Describing a study as 'opt-out' can help to normalise participation and emphasise that parents can withdraw consent.

Close to Home: Perinatal Palliative Care in a Community Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Advances in prenatal testing and diagnosis have resulted in more parents learning during pregnancy that their child may die before or shortly after birth. These advances in testing and diagnosis have also resulted in more parents choosing, despite the diagnosis, to continue their pregnancies and pursue a palliative approach to their infant's short life. Perinatal hospice and palliative care is a growing model of care developed in response to these parents' previously unmet needs. A seldom-discussed opportunity to provide this care exists in outlying community hospitals, which are ideally placed to provide care close to home for families who have chosen comfort measures and time with their child. PURPOSE: This article reviews the definition and utility of perinatal palliative care, the population it serves, attempts to support a rational for development of community-based programs, and describes one community hospital's experience with perinatal palliative care in their community. METHODS/SEARCH STRATEGY: This article describes the development and processes of a perinatal palliative care program at a community hospital in Fredericksburg, Virginia. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Perinatal palliative care can be developed with the assistance of already existing training materials, resources, and staff. While the cohort of patients may be small, implementing perinatal palliative care in a community setting may result in wider availability of this care and more accessible options for these families. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Research possibilities include developing a template for creating a perinatal palliative care program at community hospitals that could be replicated elsewhere; assessing parental satisfaction and quality indicators of perinatal palliative care at community hospitals and at referral hospitals; and assessing outcomes in various settings.

Conceptually Redefining Neonatal Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: First defined in 2002 by Catlin and Carter, neonatal palliative care (NPC) is a relatively new model of care in neonatal pediatrics, first appearing in the medical literature in the early 1980s. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to suggest a conceptual definition of NPC that encompasses all the essential concepts as a way of moving NPC forward by having a consistent approach. METHODS: Following a review of the NPC literature, a thematic analysis as a method for identifying, analyzing, and interpreting patterns of meaning in the definitions ("themes") within the literature was undertaken. FINDINGS: The major themes identified included philosophies of care, support, culture and spirituality, the team, and clinical management. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: At the heart of NPC is the primacy of maintaining quality of life, while providing ethical and humane care that supports a "good death." The extensive elements presented in this article are considered essential to a comprehensive and conceptual definition of NPC proposed here.

Neonatology in Austria: ethics to improve practice.

In the world of Austrian neonatal intensive care units, the role of ethics is recognized only partially. The normatively tense cases that are at the backdrop of this essay concern the situations around the limit of viability (weeks 22 + 0 days to 25 + 6 days of gestation), which is the point in the development of an extremely preterm infant at which there are chances of extra-uterine survival. This essay first outlines the key explicit ethical challenges that are mainly concerned with notions of uncertainty and best interest. Then, it attempts to elucidate the less explicit ethical challenges related to the notion of nudging in the neonatal practice and argue that the role of ethics needs to be recognized more-with the focus on the role of virtue ethics-in order to improve the practice of neonatal medicine.

Differing Thresholds for Overriding Parental Refusals of Life-Sustaining Treatment.

When should doctors seek protective custody to override a parent's refusal of potentially lifesaving treatment for their child? The answer to this question seemingly has different answers for different subspecialties of pediatrics. This paper specifically looks at different thresholds for physicians overriding parental refusals of life-sustaining treatment between neonatology, cardiology, and oncology. The threshold for mandating treatment of premature babies seems to be a survival rate of 25-50%. This is not the case when the treatment in question is open heart surgery for a child with congenital heart disease. Most cardiologists would not pursue legal action when parents refuse treatment, unless the anticipated survival rate after surgery is above 90%. In pediatric oncology, there are case reports of physicians requesting and obtaining protective custody for cancer treatment when the reported mortality rates are 40-50%. Such differences might be attributed to differences in care, a reasonable prioritization of quality of life over survival, or the role uncertainty plays on prognoses, especially for the extremely young. Nonetheless, other, non-medical factors may have a significant effect on inconsistencies in care across these pediatric subspecialties and require further examinations.

Ectogestation ethics: The implications of artificially extending gestation for viability, newborn resuscitation and abortion.

Recent animal research suggests that it may soon be possible to support the human fetus in an artificial uterine environment for part of a pregnancy. A technique of extending gestation in this way ("ectogestation") could be offered to parents of extremely premature infants (EPIs) to improve outcomes for their child. The use of artificial uteruses for ectogestation could generate ethical questions because of the technology's potential impact on the point of "viability"-loosely defined as the stage of pregnancy beyond which the fetus may survive external to the womb. Several medical decisions during the perinatal period are based on the gestation at which infants are considered viable, for example decisions about newborn resuscitation and abortion, and ectogestation has the potential to impact on these. Despite these possible implications, there is little existing evidence or analysis of how this technology would affect medical practice. In this paper, we combine empirical data with ethical analysis. We report a survey of 91 practicing Australian obstetricians and neonatologists; we aimed to assess their conceptual understanding of "viability," and what ethical consequences they envisage arising from improved survival of EPIs. We also assess what the ethical implications of extending gestation should be for newborn and obstetric care. We analyze the concept of viability and argue that while ectogestation might have implications for the permissibility of neonatal life-prolonging treatment at extremely early gestation, it should not necessarily have implications for abortion policy. We compare our ethical findings with the results of the survey.

Ethical Dilemmas in Neonatology - Four Theoretical Cases and Three Monotheistic Approaches: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Israel's population is diverse, with people of different religions, many of whom seek spiritual guidance during ethical dilemmas. It is paramount for healthcare providers to be familiar with different religious approaches. OBJECTIVES: To describe the attitudes of the three major monotheistic religions when encountering four complex neonatal situations. METHODS: A questionnaire related to four simulated cases was presented to each participant: a non-viable extremely premature infant (case 1), a severely asphyxiated term infant with extensive brain damage (case 2), a small preterm infant with severe brain hemorrhage and likely extensive brain damage (case 3), and a term infant with trisomy 21 syndrome and a severe cardiac malformation (case 4). RESULTS: Major differences among the three religious opinions were found in the definition of viability and in the approach towards quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Neonatologists must be sensitive to culture and religion when dealing with major ethical issues in the neonatal intensive care unit.

Nudging in Neonatology: Practical Wisdom and Accountability for Reasonableness.

OBJECTIVES: The way choice is presented has an impact on decision-making. This is the case also in the context of neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), particularly in the challenging cases that concern the limit of viability. The objective of this article is to examine the role of nudging in the shared decision-making in neonatology and elaborate on the respective moral challenges. RESULTS: Nudging is not morally neutral. There are two key sources of ethical issues at the heart of nudging. The first one concerns the lack of transparency, while the second concerns the background value judgments that are imminent whenever nudging is used for achieving a particular end. To solve the underlying conflict, a virtue ethics approach combined with the accountability for reasonableness framework is suggested to guide the use of the tool of nudging. CONCLUSIONS: NICU professionals ought to use the tool of nudging transparently in line with their act of profession and their practically wise judgment.

Shall parent / patient wishes be fulfilled in any case? A series of 32 ethics consultations: from reproductive medicine to neonatology.

BACKGROUND: Questions concerning the parent/ patient's autonomy are seen as one of the most important reasons for requesting Ethics Consultations (ECs). Respecting parent/ patient's autonomy also means respecting the patient's wishes. But those wishes may be controversial and sometimes even go beyond legal requirements. The objective of this case series of 32 ECs was to illustrate ethically challenging parent / patients' wishes during the first stages of life and how the principle of patient's autonomy was handled. METHODS: The case series has a qualitative retrospective approach. A documentary sheet was designed de novo and information was gained from EC minutes and medical charts. The cases originate from the following specialties: reproductive medicine, obstetrics and neonatology as well as two interdisciplinary cases. RESULTS: Through the structured EC minutes aspects of patient / parents' wishes could be identified explicitly. Overall the patient / parents' wishes were not supported in 61% of the cases. Central reasons for rejection of patient / parent wishes were mainly the protection of the best interest of the unborn / new-born child as well as the rejection of clinical approaches that were regarded as being substandard treatment. CONCLUSION: The study shows that treatment decisions in reproductive medicine, obstetrics and neonatology raise substantial ethical questions leading to the request for ethics consultation. The systematic case series presented here gives insight into the ethical reflection carried out to support the clinicians in their decision-making and counselling. It shows that clinicians, after using ethics consultation, make deliberate decisions that do not "automatically" fulfil the treatment requests of the patients and parents (to-be).

Professional ethics: the case of neonatology.

Neonatal professionals encounter many ethical challenges especially when it comes to interventions at the limit of viability (weeks 22-25 of gestation). At times, these challenges make the moral dilemmas in neonatology tragic and they require a particular set of intellectual and moral virtues. Intellectual virtues of episteme and phronesis, together with moral virtues of courage, compassion, keeping fidelity to trust, and integrity were highlighted as key virtues of the neonatal professional. Recognition of the role of ethics requires a recognition that answering the obvious question (what shall we do?) does not always suffice. Acknowledging the tragic question (is any of the alternatives open to us free from serious moral wrongdoing) and recognizing the ethical dilemmas, where the lines between right and wrong are blurred, leads to actions taken towards establishing ethics frameworks to support decision-making. In neonatology units, such organizational support can help in allowing the team members to recognize the ethical dilemmas, avoid moral distress, and improve team cohesion and the quality of care provided. Only when the organizational structure allows ethical dilemmas to be recognized, adequate decisions can be made.

Clinical trials in neonates: How to optimise informed consent and decision making? A European Delphi survey of parent representatives and clinicians.

OBJECTIVES: Parental consent for the participation of their neonate in neonatal research is influenced by the quality of the information delivered and the interaction between parents and investigators. Failure to provide important information may lead to difficulties in the decision making process of parents. This Delphi survey aims to establish a consensus between parent representatives of neonatal associations and healthcare professionals concerning the information deemed essential by both parties in order to improve the recruitment of neonates into clinical trials. METHOD: This study was conducted in Europe among parent representatives and healthcare professionals. In this 3-phase study, 96 items were defined by the Scientific Committee (CS), composed of 11 clinicians (from 8 countries) and 1 parent representative of the European network of neonatal associations. Then the Committee of Experts (CE) composed of 16 clinicians were matched by country with 16 national parent representatives and evaluated these items in two rounds. The importance of each item was evaluated by each member of the CE on a scale between 1 and 9 based on their personal experience. RESULTS: Fifty eight items reached the second and final level of consensus. In contrast to clinicians, parent representatives preferred to be informed about the study by the physician in charge of their child. They also favoured additional support during the informed consent process and stated that both parents need to agree and sign. CONCLUSION: The set of 58 items on which parents and clinicians reached consensus will be helpful to healthcare professionals seeking parental consent for the inclusion of a neonate in a clinical trial. Providing parents with information about the trial by the investigator in the presence of the patient's neonatologist, developing closer contacts with parents and informing them of the available support by parents associations may be helpful for parents.

WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Special cases of selective non-treatment and/or DNR.

Fetuses at low gestational age limit of viability, neonates with life threatening or life limiting congenital anomalies and deteriorating acutely ill newborn babies in intensive care, pose taxing ethical questions on whether to forego or stop treatment and allow them to die naturally. Although there is essentially no ethical difference between end of life decision between neonates and other children and adults, in the former, the fact that we are dealing with a new life, may pose greater problems to staff and parents. Good communication skills and involvement of all the team and the parents should start from the beginning to see which treatment can be foregone or stopped in the best interests of the child. This article deals with the importance of clinical ethics to avoid legal and moral showdowns and discusses accepted moral practice in this difficult area.

Values-based shared decision-making in the antenatal period.

Despite advances in life-saving technology for critically ill neonates, challenges continue to arise for infants delivered with extreme prematurity, congenital anomalies, and genetic conditions that exceed the limits of currently available interventions. In these situations, parents are forced to make cognitively and emotionally difficult decisions, in discussion with a neonatologist, regarding how aggressively to provide supportive measures at the time of delivery and at what point burdens of therapy outweigh benefits. Current guidelines recommend that parents' values should guide these decisions; however, little is known about the values parents hold, and how those values are employed in the context of complexity, uncertainty, and emotionality of these situations. Systematic investigation of how parents derive their values and how clinicians should engage with parents about those values is necessary to guide the development of interventions to enhance shared decision-making processes, ultimately improving satisfaction, coping, and resilience and minimizing the potential for regret.

Ethical implications of the use of decision aids for antenatal counseling at the limits of gestational viability.

Shared decision-making is a recent priority in neonatology. However, its implementation is at an early stage. Decision aids are tools designed to assist in shared decision-making. They help patients competently participate in making healthcare decisions. There are limited studies in neonatology on the formal use of decision aids as used in adult medicine. Decision aids are relatively new, even in adult medicine where they were pioneered; therefore, there is a lack of systematic oversight to their development and use. Despite evidence reporting a powerful effect on patients' decisions, decision aids are not subject to quality control, leading to potentially enormous ethical implications. These include: (i) possible introduction of developers' biases; (ii) use of outdated or incorrect information; (iii) misuse to steer a patient towards less expensive treatments; (iv) clinician liability if negative patient outcomes occur, since decision aids are currently not standard of care.