Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Research, education, ethics consultation: evaluating a Bioethics Unit in an Oncological Research Hospital.
De Panfilis, Ludovica; Magelssen, Morten; Costantini, Massimo; Ghirotto, Luca; Artioli, Giovanna; Turola, Elena; Perin, Marta.
Afiliação
  • De Panfilis L; Bioethics Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • Magelssen M; Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
  • Costantini M; Scientific Directorate, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • Ghirotto L; Qualitative Research Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • Artioli G; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
  • Turola E; Scientific Directorate, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • Perin M; Bioethics Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy. marta.perin@ausl.re.it.
BMC Med Ethics ; 23(1): 133, 2022 12 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36494709
BACKGROUND: This study aims to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the activities of a Bioethics Unit (BU) 5 years since its implementation (2016-2020). The BU is a research unit providing empirical research on ethical issues related to clinical practice, clinical ethics consultation, and ethical education for health care professionals (HPS). METHODS: We performed an explanatory, sequential, mixed-method, observational study, using the subsequent qualitative data to explain the initial quantitative findings. Quantitative data were collected from an internal database and analyzed by descriptive analysis. Qualitative evaluation was performed by semi-structured interviews with 18 HPs who were differently involved in the BU's activities and analyzed by framework analysis. RESULTS: Quantitative results showed an extensive increment of the number of BU research projects over the years and the number of work collaborations with other units and wards. Qualitative findings revealed four main themes, concerning: 1. the reasons for contacting the BU and the type of collaboration; 2. the role of the bioethicist; 3. the impact of BU activities on HPs, in terms of developing deeper and more mature thinking; 4. the need to extend ethics support to other settings. Overall, our results showed that performing both empirical bioethics research and more traditional clinical ethics activities at the same unit would produce an impetus to increase collaboration and spread an 'ethical culture' among local HPs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contribute to a growing body of literature on the models of clinical ethics support services and the role of empirical research in bioethics internationally. They also prepare the ground for the implementation of a multidisciplinary Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) that aims to support the BU's ethics consultation service within the local context.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bioética / Consultoria Ética Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bioética / Consultoria Ética Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article