BackgroundClinical ethics consultations can be complex interventions, involving multiple methods, stakeholders, and competing ethical values. Despite longstanding calls for rigorous evaluation in the field, progress has been limited. The Medical Research Council proposed guidelines for evaluating the effectiveness of complex interventions. The evaluation of CEC may benefit from application of the MRC framework to advance the transparency and methodological rigor of this field. A first step is to understand the outcomes measured in evaluations of CEC in healthcare settings. ObjectiveThe primary (...) objective of this review was to identify and map the outcomes reported in primary studies of CEC. The secondary objective was to provide a comprehensive overview of CEC structures, processes, and roles to enhance understanding and to inform standardization.MethodsWe searched electronic databases to identify primary studies of CEC involving patients, substitute decision-makers and/or family members, clinicians, healthcare staff and leaders. Outcomes were mapped across five conceptual domains as identified a priori based on our clinical ethics experience and preliminary literature searches and revised based on our emerging interpretation of the data. These domains included personal factors, process factors, clinical factors, quality, and resource factors. ResultsForty-eight studies were included in the review. Studies were highly heterogeneous and varied considerably regarding format and process of ethical intervention, credentials of interventionist, population of study, outcomes reported, and measures employed. In addition, few studies used validated measurement tools. The top three outcome domains that studies reported on were quality, process factors, and clinical factors. The majority of studies examined multiple outcome domains. All five outcome domains were multidimensional and included a variety of subthemes.ConclusionsThis scoping review represents the initial phase of mapping the outcomes reported in primary studies of CEC and identifying gaps in the evidence. The confirmed lack of standardization represents a hindrance to the provision of high quality intervention and CEC scientific progress. Insights gained can inform the development of a core outcome set to standardize outcome measures in CEC evaluation research and enable scientifically rigorous efficacy trials of CEC. (shrink)

An important and supposedly impactful form of clinical ethics support is moral case deliberation. Empirical evidence, however, is limited with regard to its actual impact. With this literature review, we aim to investigate the empirical evidence of MCD, thereby a) informing the practice, and b) providing a focus for further research on and development of MCD in healthcare settings. A systematic literature search was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science. Both the data collection and the (...) qualitative data analysis followed a stepwise approach, including continuous peer review and careful documentation of our decisions. The qualitative analysis was supported by ATLAS.ti. Based on a qualitative analysis of 25 empirical papers, we identified four clusters of themes: 1) facilitators and barriers in the preparation and context of MCD, i.e., a safe and open atmosphere created by a facilitator, a concrete case, commitment of participants, a focus on the moral dimension, and a supportive organization; 2) changes that are brought about on a personal and inter-professional level, with regard to professional’s feelings of relief, relatedness and confidence; understanding of the perspectives of colleagues, one’s own perspective and the moral issue at stake; and awareness of the moral dimension of one’s work and awareness of the importance of reflection; 3) changes that are brought about in caring for patients and families; and 4) changes that are brought about on an organizational level. This review shows that MCD brings about changes in practice, mostly for the professional in inter-professional interactions. Most reported changes are considered positive, although challenges, frustrations and absence of change were also reported. Empirical evidence of a concrete impact on the quality of patient care is limited and is mostly based on self-reports. With patient-focused and methodologically sound qualitative research, the practice and the value of MCD in healthcare settings can be better understood, thus making a stronger case for this kind of ethics support. (shrink)

Backgrounds Moral distress significantly affects pediatric ICU nurses, leading to nurse burnout, increased turnover and reducing patient care quality. Despite its importance, there’s a notable gap in knowledge on how to manage it effectively. Aims This review aimed to systematically identify and analyze coping strategies and interventions targeting moral distress among pediatric nurses in ICU, uncovering research gap and future studies directions. Methods A scoping review was conducted followed framework by Levac, Colquhoun, and O'Brien and Arksey and O'Malley. Searches were (...) performed in 11 electrical databases, like PubMed and China Biology Medicine disc, within a timeframe of the database construction to November 2023, and performed literature screening and data extraction. Results Sixteen articles were ultimately included. Coping strategies adopted by pediatric ICUs nurses can be categorized into adaptive and maladaptive strategies, with the latter including passive acceptance, taking leave, and drinking, while the former involve pursuing interests outside of work, reflection and philosophizing, and communication. Nine articles described and evaluated the effectiveness of interventions for moral distress, categorizing them into individual and institutional levels. Individual-level interventions include Interprofessional Perspective-Taking, the PICU Resiliency Bundle, Ethics Education/Skills, and the Center for Caring. Institutional-level interventions encompasses Comprehensive Care Round, Goals of Care Conversations, Pediatric Ethics and Communication Excellence Rounds, Nursing Ethics Council, and Medical Ethical Decision-Making, though not all were effective in alleviating moral distress. Conclusions Nurses often use self-adjustment strategies for moral distress, institutional ethical support focusing on enhancing nurses’ moral resilience, promoting reflective thinking and improving communication remains crucial. Various interventions for moral distress are currently available, but nurse engagement is low and their effectiveness remained to be verified. Future studies should explore what aids or hinders these interventions. There’s also a need for large, multicenter trials and ongoing evaluations to create effective support systems for pediatric ICU nurses. (shrink)

When healthcare professionals feel constrained from acting in a patient’s best interests, moral distress ensues. The resulting negative sequelae of burnout, poor retention rates, and ultimately poor patient care are well recognized across healthcare providers. Yet an appreciation of how particular disciplines, including physicians, come to be “constrained” in their actions is still lacking. This paper will examine how the application of shared decision-making may contribute to the experience of moral distress for physicians and why such distress may go under-recognized. (...) Appreciation of these dynamics may assist in cross-discipline sensitivity, enabling more constructive dialogue and collaboration. (shrink)