BackgroundAmidst expanding roles in education and policy making, questions have been raised about the ability of Clinical Ethics Committees (CEC) s to carry out effective ethics consultations (CECons). However recent reviews of CECs suggest that there is no uniformity to CECons and no effective means of assessing the quality of CECons. To address this gap a systematic scoping review of prevailing tools used to assess CECons was performed to foreground and guide the design of a tool to evaluate the quality (...) of CECons.MethodsGuided by Levac et al’s (2010) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews, the research team performed independent literature reviews of accounts of assessments of CECons published in six databases. The included articles were independently analyzed using content and thematic analysis to enhance the validity of the findings.ResultsNine thousand sixty-six abstracts were identified, 617 full-text articles were reviewed, 104 articles were analyzed and four themes were identified – the purpose of the CECons evaluation, the various domains assessed, the methods of assessment used and the long-term impact of these evaluations.ConclusionThis review found prevailing assessments of CECons to be piecemeal due to variable goals, contextual factors and practical limitations. The diversity in domains assessed and tools used foregrounds the lack of minimum standards upheld to ensure baseline efficacy.To advance a contextually appropriate, culturally sensitive, program specific assessment tool to assess CECons, clear structural and competency guidelines must be established in the curation of CECons programs, to evaluate their true efficacy and maintain clinical, legal and ethical standards. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungWährend die Implementierung und Nutzung von Ethikberatung in deutschen Krankenhäusern in den letzten 20 Jahren vorangeschritten ist, entstehen erst in den letzten Jahren zunehmend Ethikberatungsangebote im außerklinischen Bereich. In den Landkreisen Traunstein und Berchtesgadener Land in Südost-Bayern wurde 2012 eine außerklinische Ethikberatung etabliert. Um im Rahmen einer ersten Evaluation wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse über den Bedarf, die Inanspruchnahme und die Zufriedenheit mit diesem Beratungsangebot zu gewinnen, wurde eine Dokumentenanalyse und eine Fragebogenerhebung unter den Hausärzten der beiden Landkreise durchgeführt. Insgesamt nahmen 58 der (...) 195 angeschriebenen Hausärzte an der Umfrage teil.Die Auswertung der Dokumentation der außerklinischen Ethikberatung zeigte, dass die meisten Anfragen von betreuenden Angehörigen und aus Pflegeheimen kamen. Den Ergebnissen der Fragebogenerhebung zufolge sahen sich die Hausärzte mit vielfältigen ethischen Fragestellungen konfrontiert. Das Angebot einer ethischen Fallbesprechung zur Lösung dieser Konflikte wurde bislang jedoch nur von 17 Hausärzten in Anspruch genommen. Als Hauptgründe für die fehlende Nutzung des Angebots wurde der mangelnde Bekanntheitsgrad, der fehlende Bedarf und der organisatorische bzw. zeitliche Aufwand angeführt. Gleichzeitig äußerten Hausärzte, die eine ethische Fallbesprechung in Anspruch genommen haben, zu einem Großteil Interesse an einer erneuten Beratung und empfanden das Ergebnis der Ethikberatung als hilfreich. Damit verdeutlichen die Ergebnisse der Studie, dass Hausärzte zwar vielfältige ethische Fragestellungen in ihrem Arbeitsalltag wahrnehmen, aber bislang nur vergleichsweise selten ein externes Beratungsangebot zur Entscheidungsunterstützung in Betracht ziehen. (shrink)

Ethics consultation in institutions of the healthcare system has been given a standard form based on three pillars: education, the development of guidelines and concrete ethics consultation in case conferences. The spread of ethics committees, which perform these tasks on an organizational level, is a remarkable historic achievement. At the same time it cannot be denied that modern ethics consultation neglects relevant aspects of care ethics approaches. In our essay we present an “ethics of care” approach as well as an (...) empirical pilot project—“Ethics from the bottom up”—which organizes ethics consultation based on this focus. Findings and philosophy of the project will be discussed as far as relevant for ethics consultation in the healthcare system. (shrink)

Evaluating clinical ethics support services has been hailed as important research task. At the same time, there is considerable debate about how to evaluate CESS appropriately. The criticism, which has been aired, refers to normative as well as empirical aspects of evaluating CESS. In this paper, we argue that a first necessary step for progress is to better understand the intervention in CESS. Tools of complex intervention research methodology may provide relevant means in this respect. In a first step, we (...) introduce principles of “complex intervention research” and show how CESS fulfil the criteria of “complex interventions”. In a second step, we develop a generic “conceptual framework” for “ethics consultation on request” as standard for many forms of ethics consultation in clinical ethics practice. We apply this conceptual framework to the model of “bioethics mediation” to make explicit the specific structural and procedural elements of this form of ethics consultation on request. In a final step we conduct a comparative analysis of two different types of CESS, which have been subject to evaluation research: “proactive ethics consultation” and “moral case deliberation” and discuss implications for evaluating both types of CESS. To make explicit different premises of implemented CESS interventions by means of conceptual frameworks can inform the search for sound empirical evaluation of CESS. In addition, such work provides a starting point for further reflection about what it means to offer “good” CESS. (shrink)

BackgroundHealthcare providers have to make ethically complex clinical decisions which may be a source of stress. Researchers have recently introduced Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based applications to assist in clinical ethical decision-making. However, the use of such tools is controversial. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the reasons given in the academic literature for and against their use.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, Philpapers.org and Google Scholar were searched for all relevant publications. The resulting set of publications was title and abstract (...) screened according to defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in 44 papers whose full texts were analysed using the Kuckartz method of qualitative text analysis.ResultsArtificial Intelligence might increase patient autonomy by improving the accuracy of predictions and allowing patients to receive their preferred treatment. It is thought to increase beneficence by providing reliable information, thereby, supporting surrogate decision-making. Some authors fear that reducing ethical decision-making to statistical correlations may limit autonomy. Others argue that AI may not be able to replicate the process of ethical deliberation because it lacks human characteristics. Concerns have been raised about issues of justice, as AI may replicate existing biases in the decision-making process.ConclusionsThe prospective benefits of using AI in clinical ethical decision-making are manifold, but its development and use should be undertaken carefully to avoid ethical pitfalls. Several issues that are central to the discussion of Clinical Decision Support Systems, such as justice, explicability or human–machine interaction, have been neglected in the debate on AI for clinical ethics so far.Trial registrationThis review is registered at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/wvcs9). (shrink)

This study describes which clinical ethics approaches are available to support healthcare personnel in clinical practice in terms of their construction, functions and goals. Healthcare personnel frequently face ethically difficult situations in the course of their work and these issues cover a wide range of areas from prenatal care to end-of-life care. Although various forms of clinical ethics support have been developed, to our knowledge there is a lack of review studies describing which ethics support approaches are available, how they (...) are constructed and their goals in supporting healthcare personnel in clinical practice. This study engages in an integrative literature review. We searched for peer-reviewed academic articles written in English between 2000 and 2016 using specific Mesh terms and manual keywords in CINAHL, MEDLINE and Psych INFO databases. In total, 54 articles worldwide described clinical ethics support approaches that include clinical ethics consultation, clinical ethics committees, moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups, and ethics reflection groups. Clinical ethics consultation and clinical ethics committees have various roles and functions in different countries. They can provide healthcare personnel with advice and recommendations regarding the best course of action. Moral case deliberation, ethics rounds, ethics discussion groups and ethics reflection groups support the idea that group reflection increases insight into ethical issues. Clinical ethics support in the form of a “bottom-up” perspective might give healthcare personnel opportunities to think and reflect more than a “top-down” perspective. A “bottom-up” approach leaves the healthcare personnel with the moral responsibility for their choice of action in clinical practice, while a “top-down” approach risks removing such moral responsibility. (shrink)

Ethik-Komitees gehören zum festen Bestandteil des Ethikmanagements und der Organisationsethik in klinischen Einrichtungen des Gesundheitswesens. Entsprechende Ethikstrukturen und die damit verbundenen Angebote stoßen hinsichtlich ihrer Wirksamkeit allerdings an ihre Grenzen. Ihre Arbeitsweisen sind häufig reaktiv und eine Verankerung in den entsprechenden Organisationsebenen fehlt. Ausgehend von diesen Limitationen der klinischen Ethikberatung hat sich die multiprofessionelle „Arbeitsgruppe Ethik“ am Universitätsklinikum Tübingen um die Konzeption und Implementierung eines neuen Ansatzes zur nachhaltigen Integration von ethischen Reflexions- und Entscheidungsprozessen auf den Stationen des UKT bemüht. (...) Mit dem Tübinger Modell der Ethikbeauftragten der Station verfolgt sie ein Pilotprojekt, das speziell geschulte Pflegekräfte aus allen Stationen des UKT als AnsprechpartnerInnen für ethische Fragen einsetzt. Damit stellen die Ethikbeauftragten eine Erweiterung zu etablierten Strukturen der Ethikberatung dar und ergänzen vorhandene Top-Down-Strategien. Der vorliegende Beitrag stellt die Zielsetzungen des Tübinger Modells dar und schildert erste Erfahrungen in der Umsetzung. Neben der Einbettung in organisationale Strukturen der Ethikberatung werden die stationsinternen und stationsübergreifenden Aufgaben der Ethikbeauftragten dargestellt. Zudem wird das Qualifikationsprogramm für Ethikbeauftragte sowie ein Train-the-Trainer-Konzept vorgestellt, welche eine vertiefende Entwicklung von pflege- und medizinethischer Kompetenzen unterstützen und Sicherheit in den stationsbezogenen Reflexions- und Entscheidungsprozessen vermitteln. (shrink)

BackgroundThe theory and practice of ethics consultations (ECs) in health care are still characterized by many controversies, including, for example, the practice of giving recommendations. These controversies are complicated by an astonishing lack of evidence in the whole field. It is not clear how often a recommendation is issued in ethics consultations and when and why this step is taken. Especially in a facilitation model in which giving recommendations is optional, more data would be helpful to evaluate daily practice, ensure (...) that this practice is in line with the overarching goals of this approach and support the development of standards.MethodsWe analyzed all consultations requested from an EC service working under a facilitation approach at a maximum-care university hospital in Germany over a period of more than 10 years. Our aim was to better understand why—and under what circumstances—some consultation requests result in a recommendation, whereas others can be sufficiently addressed solely by facilitated meetings. We especially wanted to know when and why clients felt the need for clear advice from the EC service while in other cases they did not. We compared ethics consultations in terms of the differences between cases with and without recommendations issued by the ethics consultants using χ2 difference tests and Welch’s t-test.ResultsA total of 243 ECs were carried out between September 2008 and December 2019. In approximately half of the cases, a recommendation was given. All recommendations were issued upon the request of clients. When physicians asked for an EC, the consultation was significantly more likely to result in a recommendation than when the EC was requested by any other party. ECs in cases on wards with ethics rounds resulted in comparably fewer recommendations than those in wards without ethics rounds. When interpersonal conflicts were part of the problem or relatives were present in the meeting, clients less frequently asked for a recommendation.ConclusionFrom the client’s point of view, there does not seem to be only one “right” way to provide ethics consultations, but rather several. While facilitated meetings are obviously appreciated by clients, there also seem to be situations in which a recommendation is desired (especially by physicians). Further empirical and theoretical research is needed to validate our single-center results and re-evaluate the role of recommendations in ethics consultations. (shrink)

Since 1989, clinical ethics consultation in form of hospital ethics committees was established in most of the transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Up to now, the similarities and differences between HECs in Central and Eastern Europe and their counterparts in the U.S. and Western Europe have not been determined. Through search in literature databases, we have identified studies that document the implementation of clinical ethics consultation in Central and Eastern Europe. These studies have been analyzed under the following (...) aspects: mode of establishment of HECs, character of consultation they provide, and their composition. The results show that HECs in the transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe differ from their western-European or U.S. counterparts with regard to these three aspects. HECs were established because of centrally imposed legal regulations. Little initiatives in this area were taken by medical professionals interested in resolving emerging ethical issues. HECs in the transition countries concentrate mostly on review of research protocols or resolution of administrative conflicts in healthcare institutions. Moreover, integration of non-professional third parties in the workings of HECs is often neglected. We argue that these differences can be attributed to the historical background and the role of medicine in these countries under the communist regime. Political and organizational structures of healthcare as well as education of healthcare staff during this period influenced current functioning of clinical ethics consultation in the transition countries. (shrink)

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Advance Care Planning (ACP) wird auch in Deutschland zunehmend praktiziert. Aus klinisch-ethischer Perspektive bietet ACP eine Möglichkeit, Vorausverfügungen zu konkretisieren und auf diese Weise die Entscheidungsfindung bei fehlender Selbstbestimmungsfähigkeit von Patient:innen zu unterstützen. Während es für Gesprächsangebote im Sinne des ACP in Pflegeeinrichtungen und Einrichtungen der Eingliederungshilfe seit 2015 Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten gibt und erste Studien zu Angeboten veröffentlich wurden, fehlt es in Deutschland bisher an publizierten Evaluationsstudien zu ACP-Angeboten im Krankenhaus. Intervention und Methoden Im vorliegenden Beitrag erfolgt die strukturierte (...) Darstellung von ACP als ein Element des klinisch-ethischen Unterstützungsangebotes am Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale) (UKH). Es erfolgte eine quantitative Inhaltsanalyse der schriftlichen Dokumentation von durchgeführten ACP-Gesprächsprozessen für den Zeitraum der Pilotphase von 01/2020 bis 08/2021 (20 Monate). Ergebnisse Im Zeitraum wurden 93 ACP-Gespräche angefragt. Mit 79 Patient:innen konnten 110 Gespräche geführt werden. 46 % der Anfragen kamen von Palliative Care betreuten Patient:innen. Im Durchschnitt dauerten die Beratungen 45 min. Der Gesprächsprozess zur Erstellung einer Patientenverfügung benötigte durchschnittlich 122 min und 2,5 Gespräche. Bei 23 % der Patient:innen endete der ACP-Prozess nach dem Erstgespräch. Die Inhalte der ACP-Prozesse tangierten verschiedene Bereiche anderer Professionen im Krankenhaus, insbesondere die Entscheidungsfindung über aktuelle Diagnostik und Therapie zwischen Ärzt:innen und Patient:innen. Diskussion Die Einführung eines ACP-Angebotes im Krankenhaus zeigt neben einer Vielzahl an Chancen auch Herausforderungen auf, welche es im gemeinsamen Diskurs zu bewältigen gilt. Bei der Einbettung eines ACP-Angebots im Krankenhaus müssen die Besonderheiten der Klinik und insbesondere die Abgrenzung von ACP zu anderen Arbeitsfeldern der Ethikberatung, wie beispielsweise die Ethikfallberatung, bedacht werden. (shrink)

BackgroundClinical ethics case consultations (CECCs) provide a structured approach in situations of ethical uncertainty or conflicts. There have been increasing calls in recent years to assess the quality of CECCs by means of empirical research. This study provides detailed data of a descriptive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a CECC service in a department of cardiology and intensive care at a German university hospital.MethodsSemi-structured document analysis of CECCs was conducted in the period of November 1, 2018, to May 31, 2020. (...) All documents were analysed by two researchers independently.ResultsTwenty-four CECCs were requested within the study period, of which most (n = 22; 92%) had been initiated by physicians of the department. The patients were an average of 79 years old (R: 43–96), and 14 (58%) patients were female. The median length of stay prior to request was 12.5 days (R: 1–65 days). The most frequent diagnoses (several diagnoses possible) were cardiology-related (n = 29), followed by sepsis (n = 11) and cancer (n = 6). Twenty patients lacked decisional capacity. The main reason for a CECC request was uncertainty about the balancing of potential benefit and harm related to the medically indicated treatment (n = 18). Further reasons included differing views regarding the best individual treatment option between health professionals and patients (n = 3) or between different team members (n = 3). Consensus between participants could be reached in 18 (75%) consultations. The implementation of a disease specific treatment intervention was recommended in five cases. Palliative care and limitation of further disease specific interventions was recommended in 12 cases.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first in-depth evaluation of a CECC service set up for an academic department of cardiology and intensive medical care. Patient characteristics and the issues deliberated during CECC provide a starting point for the development and testing of more tailored clinical ethics support services and research on CECC outcomes. (shrink)

In the three target articles, Ellen Fox et al. present data from their seminal study on ethics consultation in US general hospitals (Fox, Danis, et al. 2022, Fox and Duke 2022, Fox, Tarzian, et al....

The prevalence of Clinical ethics support services is increasing. Yet, questions about what quality of CES entails and how to foster the quality of CES remain. This paper describes the development of a national network, which aimed to conceptualize and foster the quality of CES in the Netherlands simultaneously. Our methodology was inspired by a responsive evaluation approach which shares some of our key theoretical presuppositions of CES. A responsive evaluation methodology engages stakeholders in developing quality standards of a certain (...) practice, instead of evaluating a practice by predefined standards. In this paper, we describe the relationship between our theoretical viewpoint on CES and a responsive evaluation methodology. Then we describe the development of the network and focus on three activities that exemplify our approach. In the discussion, we reflect on the similarities and differences between our approach and other international initiatives focusing on the quality of CES. (shrink)

Background: Clinical ethics support services have been advocated in recent decades. In clinical practice, clinical ethics support services are often requested for difficult decisions near the end of life. However, their contribution to improving healthcare has been questioned and demands for evaluation have been put forward. Research indicates that there are considerable challenges associated with defining adequate outcomes for clinical ethics support services. In this systematic review, we report findings of qualitative studies and surveys, which have been conducted to evaluate (...) clinical ethics support services near the end of life. Methods: Electronic databases and other sources were queried from 1970 to May 2018. Two authors screened studies independently. Methodological quality of studies was assessed. For each arm of the review, an individual synthesis was performed. Prospero ID: CRD42016036241. Ethical Considerations: Ethical approval is not needed as it is a systematic review of published literature. Results: In all, 2088 hits on surveys and 2786 on qualitative studies were found. After screening, nine surveys and four qualitative studies were included. Survey studies report overall positive findings using a very wide and heterogeneous range of outcomes. Negative results were reported only occasionally. However, methodological quality and conceptual justification of used outcomes was often weak and limits generalizability of results. Conclusion: Evidence points to positive outcomes of clinical ethics support services. However, methodological quality needs to be improved. Further qualitative or mixed-method research on evaluating clinical ethics support services may contribute to the development of evaluating outcomes of clinical ethics support services by means of broaden the range of appropriate (process-oriented) outcomes of (different types of) clinical ethics support services. (shrink)

Clinical Ethics Consultations are an important tool for physicians in solving difficult cases. They are extremely common in North America and to a lesser extent also present in Europe. However, there is little data on this practice in Poland. We present results of a survey of 521 physicians practising in Poland concerning their opinion on CECs and related practices. We analysed the data looking at such issues as CECs’ perceived availability, use of CECs, and perceived usefulness of such support. Physicians (...) in our study generally encounter hard ethics cases, even—surprisingly—those who do not work in hospitals. Most physicians have no CEC access, and those that do still do not employ CECs. However, physicians perceive this form of support as useful—even more so among actual users of CECs. We compared these findings with similar studies from other European countries and the North America. We point out peculiarities of our results as compared to those in other countries, with some possible explanations. We hope the results may encourage regulatory debate on the need to formally introduce CECs into the Polish healthcare system. (shrink)

Although clinical ethics consultation has existed for more than 40 years in the USA and Europe, it was not available in Bulgaria until recently. In introducing clinical ethics consultation into our country, the Modular, Ethical, Treatment, Allocation of resources, Process methodology has been preferred because of its potential to be used in resource-poor settings and its strong educational function. This paper presents the results of a METAP evaluation in a hospital palliative care ward in the town of Vratsa. The evaluation (...) was based on Beauchamp and Childress’ four principles of biomedical ethics and involves implementation of specific instruments for clinical ethics decision-making. Research tasks emphasised analyses of ethics meetings in the ward. Data were processed by SPSS v.24 using descriptive statistical analysis. Altogether, 32 ethics meetings of an average duration 20.63 min were conducted on cases involving critically ill patients. Most of the participants expressed satisfaction with the ethics process. The principlist approach supported resolution of conflicts between autonomous patients and their relatives, clarified definitions of “medical benefit” and “social good,” and enabled assessments of the risk of unequal treatment. Even as the specific research tasks were achieved, further participant follow-up is necessary to identify any improvement in healthcare personnel’s ethical competence. METAP worked well in end-of-life care settings. Participants experienced several benefits, including improved team communication, better understanding of patient preferences, and confidence in the correctness of decisions. Despite the significant educational potential of METAP, the need for additional and ongoing ethics training of health professionals should not be underestimated. (shrink)