Learning healthcare systems in cardiology: A qualitative interview study on ethical dilemmas of a learning healthcare system

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Learning Health Systems Pub Date : 2023-07-15 DOI:10.1002/lrh2.10379
Sara Laurijssen, Rieke van der Graaf, Ewoud Schuit, Melina den Haan, Wouter van Dijk, Rolf Groenwold, Saskia le Sessie, Diederick Grobbee, Martine de Vries
{"title":"Learning healthcare systems in cardiology: A qualitative interview study on ethical dilemmas of a learning healthcare system","authors":"Sara Laurijssen,&nbsp;Rieke van der Graaf,&nbsp;Ewoud Schuit,&nbsp;Melina den Haan,&nbsp;Wouter van Dijk,&nbsp;Rolf Groenwold,&nbsp;Saskia le Sessie,&nbsp;Diederick Grobbee,&nbsp;Martine de Vries","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.10379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Implementation of an LHS in cardiology departments presents itself with ethical challenges, including ethical review and informed consent. In this qualitative study, we investigated stakeholders' attitudes toward ethical issues regarding the implementation of an LHS in the cardiology department.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a qualitative study using 35 semi-structured interviews and 5 focus group interviews with 34 individuals. We interviewed cardiologists, research nurses, cardiovascular patients, ethicists, health lawyers, epidemiologists/statisticians and insurance spokespersons.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Respondents identified different ethical obstacles for the implementation of an LHS within the cardiology department. These obstacles were mainly on ethical oversight in LHSs; in particular, informed con sent and data ownership were discussed. In addition, respondents reported on the role of patients in LHS. Respondents described the LHS as a possibility for patients to engage in both research and care. While the LHS can promote patient engagement, patients might also be reduced to their data and are therefore at risk, according to respondents.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Views on the ethical dilemmas of a LHSs within cardiology are diverse. Similar to the literary debate on oversight, there are different views on how ethical oversight should be regulated. This study adds to the literary debate on oversight by highlighting that patients wish to be informed about the learning activities within the LHS they participate in, and that they wish to actively contribute by sharing their data and identifying learning goals, provided that informed consent is obtained.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.10379","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lrh2.10379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Implementation of an LHS in cardiology departments presents itself with ethical challenges, including ethical review and informed consent. In this qualitative study, we investigated stakeholders' attitudes toward ethical issues regarding the implementation of an LHS in the cardiology department.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study using 35 semi-structured interviews and 5 focus group interviews with 34 individuals. We interviewed cardiologists, research nurses, cardiovascular patients, ethicists, health lawyers, epidemiologists/statisticians and insurance spokespersons.

Results

Respondents identified different ethical obstacles for the implementation of an LHS within the cardiology department. These obstacles were mainly on ethical oversight in LHSs; in particular, informed con sent and data ownership were discussed. In addition, respondents reported on the role of patients in LHS. Respondents described the LHS as a possibility for patients to engage in both research and care. While the LHS can promote patient engagement, patients might also be reduced to their data and are therefore at risk, according to respondents.

Conclusions

Views on the ethical dilemmas of a LHSs within cardiology are diverse. Similar to the literary debate on oversight, there are different views on how ethical oversight should be regulated. This study adds to the literary debate on oversight by highlighting that patients wish to be informed about the learning activities within the LHS they participate in, and that they wish to actively contribute by sharing their data and identifying learning goals, provided that informed consent is obtained.

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
心脏病学中的学习医疗系统:关于学习医疗系统伦理困境的定性访谈研究
背景 在心脏科实施 LHS 会面临伦理方面的挑战,包括伦理审查和知情同意。在这项定性研究中,我们调查了利益相关者对心脏科实施 LHS 的伦理问题的态度。 方法 我们对 34 人进行了 35 次半结构化访谈和 5 次焦点小组访谈,从而开展了一项定性研究。我们采访了心脏病专家、研究护士、心血管病患者、伦理学家、健康律师、流行病学家/统计学家和保险发言人。 结果 受访者指出了在心脏科实施 LHS 所面临的不同伦理障碍。这些障碍主要涉及长效医疗系统的伦理监督,尤其是知情同意和数据所有权问题。此外,受访者还报告了患者在 LHS 中的作用。受访者认为长期健康服务为患者参与研究和护理提供了可能。受访者认为,虽然 LHS 可以促进患者的参与,但患者也可能沦为其数据的一部分,因此面临风险。 结论 对心脏病学中的生命健康系统的伦理困境存在不同看法。与文学界关于监督的争论类似,人们对如何规范伦理监督也有不同的看法。本研究为有关监督的文学辩论增添了新的内容,强调了患者希望了解他们所参与的生命健康服务中的学习活动,并希望在获得知情同意的前提下,通过分享自己的数据和确定学习目标来做出积极贡献。
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
Learning Health Systems
Learning Health Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
22.60%
发文量
55
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Envisioning public health as a learning health system Thanks to our peer reviewers Learning health systems to implement chronic disease prevention programs: A novel framework and perspectives from an Australian health service The translation-to-policy learning cycle to improve public health
×
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