ASPEN international survey on ethical competencies dealing with decision-making in the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration and competency application in clinical practice.

Abstract

Background: Ethical competencies dealing with decision-making for clinicians involved in artificially administered nutrition and hydration (AANH) have not been defined in the literature. Although clinical assessments identify nutrition needs and appropriate routes of nutrition administration, an assessment of the ethical, cultural, and spiritual implications of the medical nutrition therapy may be overlooked.

Methods: Eleven competency statements were developed by members of two international sections of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. This descriptive cross-sectional survey study was conducted to measure the importance of the competency statements to the membership of two sections using a five-point Likert scale of 1-5 (1-low to 5-high).

Results: A total of 113 responses (12.5% response rate) were obtained predominantly from physicians and dietitians from 25 countries. There was a wide range of world regions of the 49% respondents outside of the United States. Means and SDs were calculated for agreement with the 11 competency statements with overall means ranging from 4.32 to 4.67. Most of the participants cared for adult/older adult patients (63.7%) exclusively, and 12.4% cared for pediatric/neonate patients exclusively; the remainder (23.9%) cared for both populations. Respondents reported they were either experienced, competent, or expert (88.6%) in dealing with ethical issues related to AANH.

Conclusion: This international interdisciplinary group agreed that the integration of ethical, cultural, and spiritual competencies into clinical decision-making regarding artificially AANH is important.