[Ethical Attitudes and Handling in Prenatal Conflict Situations - A Survey among Obstetricians and Prenatal Diagnosticians in Germany].

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie Pub Date : 2024-01-22 DOI:10.1055/a-2217-9635
Katja Schneider, Johanna Müller, Tatjana Tissen-Diabaté, Ekkehard Schleußner
{"title":"[Ethical Attitudes and Handling in Prenatal Conflict Situations - A Survey among Obstetricians and Prenatal Diagnosticians in Germany].","authors":"Katja Schneider, Johanna Müller, Tatjana Tissen-Diabaté, Ekkehard Schleußner","doi":"10.1055/a-2217-9635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Various studies have shown that belonging to a professional group has an influence on ethical attitudes. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the attitudes and approaches of obstetrical specialists and prenatal diagnosticians in prenatal conflict situations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Explorative cross-sectional online survey among tertiary perinatal care centers and prenatal diagnosticians with DEGUM Level II/III in Germany. The questionnaire included questions on ethical attitudes in the perinatal context and a case presentation of a fetal hypoplastic left heart syndrome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 57.1% (310/543). 55.5% of the respondents practiced both obstetrics and prenatal diagnostics, 24.5% exclusively prenatal diagnostics, and 14.2% purely obstetrics. 27% agreed with the statement \"An uncertain prognosis justifies pregnancy termination\". For complex fetal malformations joint interdisciplinary counseling was advocated by 98.3%. Addressing the option of postnatal palliative treatment in a case of a hypoplastic left heart syndrome was accepted by 84.3% across all professional groups, while mentioning fetocide was more frequently cited as an option by prenatal diagnosticians than by obstetricians (57.7% vs. 34.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Interdisciplinary prenatal parental counseling in complex fetal malformations is uniformly advocated by prenatal diagnosticians and obstetricians in Germany. However, different ethical attitudes appear among specialists groups with regard to the option of termination of pregnancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":23854,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2217-9635","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Various studies have shown that belonging to a professional group has an influence on ethical attitudes. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the attitudes and approaches of obstetrical specialists and prenatal diagnosticians in prenatal conflict situations.

Methods: Explorative cross-sectional online survey among tertiary perinatal care centers and prenatal diagnosticians with DEGUM Level II/III in Germany. The questionnaire included questions on ethical attitudes in the perinatal context and a case presentation of a fetal hypoplastic left heart syndrome.

Results: The response rate was 57.1% (310/543). 55.5% of the respondents practiced both obstetrics and prenatal diagnostics, 24.5% exclusively prenatal diagnostics, and 14.2% purely obstetrics. 27% agreed with the statement "An uncertain prognosis justifies pregnancy termination". For complex fetal malformations joint interdisciplinary counseling was advocated by 98.3%. Addressing the option of postnatal palliative treatment in a case of a hypoplastic left heart syndrome was accepted by 84.3% across all professional groups, while mentioning fetocide was more frequently cited as an option by prenatal diagnosticians than by obstetricians (57.7% vs. 34.1%).

Conclusion: Interdisciplinary prenatal parental counseling in complex fetal malformations is uniformly advocated by prenatal diagnosticians and obstetricians in Germany. However, different ethical attitudes appear among specialists groups with regard to the option of termination of pregnancy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[产前冲突情况下的伦理态度和处理方法--德国产科医生和产前诊断师调查]。
目的:多项研究表明,专业群体的归属对伦理态度有影响。本研究旨在评估和比较产科专家和产前诊断人员在产前冲突情况下的态度和方法:方法:对德国三级围产保健中心和 DEGUM 二级/三级产前诊断师进行探索性横断面在线调查。调查问卷包括围产期伦理态度问题和胎儿左心发育不良综合征病例演示:答卷率为 57.1%(310/543)。55.5%的受访者同时从事产科和产前诊断工作,24.5%的受访者只从事产前诊断工作,14.2%的受访者只从事产科工作。27%的受访者同意 "预后不确定是终止妊娠的理由 "这一说法。对于复杂的胎儿畸形,98.3%的人主张进行跨学科联合咨询。在所有专业群体中,84.3%的人同意对左心室发育不全综合征病例进行产后姑息治疗,而产前诊断医生比产科医生更常提及杀胎(57.7% 对 34.1%):结论:在德国,产前诊断医生和产科医生一致提倡对复杂胎儿畸形进行跨学科产前父母咨询。结论:在德国,产前诊断医生和产科医生一致提倡对复杂胎儿畸形进行跨学科产前父母咨询,但对于终止妊娠的选择,各专家群体的伦理态度有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie
Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
166
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gynäkologen, Geburtshelfer, Hebammen, Neonatologen, Pädiater
期刊最新文献
Intrapericardial Teratoma and Associated 3q29 Deletion in a Fetus: Case Report. Evaluation of Ophthalmic Artery Doppler Parameters in Preeclamptic and Normotensive Pregnant Women. [Pneumonia due to Mycoplasma hominis in a Full-Term Newborn - A Case Report with Literature Review]. ["Who cares about us?" Results of a cross-sectional study on the psychosocial health of obstetricians and midwives after traumatic birth experiences]. [Legal Compliance of Medical Information in the Case of a Relatively Indicated Secondary Caesarean Section in Obstetric Clinics in Germany - Part II: New Information Concept].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1