Introduction: Healthcare practitioners have a legal, ethical and professional obligation to obtain patient consent for all healthcare treatments. There is increasing evidence which suggests dissonance and variation in practice in assessment of decision-making capacity and consent processes. Aims: This study explores healthcare practitioners’ knowledge and practices of assessing decision-making capacity and obtaining patient consent to treatment in the acute generalist setting. Methods: An exploratory descriptive cross-sectional survey design, using an online questionnaire, method was employed with all professional groups invited via (...) email to participate. Data were collected over 3 months from July to September 2015. Survey content and format was reviewed by the liaison psychiatry team and subsequently contained five sections (demographics, general knowledge and practice, delirium context, legal aspects and education/training). Descriptive, univariate and bivariate analysis of quantitative data and qualitative content analysis of qualitative data were undertaken. Ethical considerations: The study was approved by the institutional Human Research and Ethics Committee and informed consent was taken to be provided by participants upon completion and submission of the de-identified survey. Results: In total, 86 participants engaged the survey with n = 24, exiting at the first consent question. Almost two-thirds of respondents indicated that all treatments required patient consent. Knowledge of consent and decision-making capacity as legal constructs was deficient. Decision-making capacity was primarily assessed using professional judgement and perceived predominantly as the responsibility of medical and psychology staff. A range of patient psychological and behavioural symptoms were identified as indicators requiring assessment of decision-making capacity. Despite this, many patients with delirium have their decision-making capacity assessed and documented only sometimes. Uncertain knowledge and inconsistent application of legislative frameworks are evident. Many participants were unsure of the legal mechanisms for obtaining substitute consent in patients with impaired decision-making capacity and refusing treatment. Conclusion: The legal context of decision-making capacity and consent to treatment appears complex for healthcare practitioners. Professional, ethical and legal standards of care in this context can benefit from structured education programmes and supportive governance processes. An understanding of why ‘duty of care’ is being used as a framework within the context of impaired decision-making capacity is warranted, alongside a review of the context of Duty of Care within health policy, guidance and faculty teaching. (shrink)

Background: Most previous studies on moral distress focused on the factors that cause moral distress, paying inadequate attention to the moral conflict of nurses’ values, the physician–nurse power hierarchy, and the influence of the culture. Research objective: To analyze the main causes for moral distress with interpretive interactionism. Research design: A qualitative study was adopted. Participants: Through purposeful sampling, 32 nurses from 12 different departments were chosen as the samples. Ethical considerations: Approval from the Institutional Review Board of the Kaohsiung (...) Medical University Hospital. Findings: Moral distress is likely to occur in the following clinical situations: patients have no idea about their diseases; the medical decisions fail to meet the optimum benefit of patients; and patients with terminal cancers are not given a proper death. The reason why nurses become trapped in moral distress is that they fail to achieve moral goodness. Inadequate confidence, the physician–nurse power hierarchy, and the Oriental culture affect nurses’ goodness-based intention for patients, which deteriorates moral distress. Discussion: The main cause for moral distress is the moral goodness of nurses. If nurses’ goodness-based intention for patients is inconsistent with the moral objective of achieving optimum benefit for patients, it leads to moral distress. Culture is an essential background factor of care for patients. In the Oriental culture, family members influence patients’ right to know about their diseases, the choice of treatment, and patients’ autonomy of not receiving cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. This results in moral distress in medical care. Conclusion: The occurrence of moral distress demonstrates that nurses have moral characteristics such as goodness and caring. It is suggested that appropriate educational strategies can be adopted to weaken the power hierarchy between physicians and nurses and enhance nurses’ confidence and cultural sensitivity, so as to reduce the moral distress of nurses. (shrink)