调查 COVID-19 大流行期间土耳其稀缺资源的分配情况:医疗保健专业人员优先考虑哪些标准?

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Developing World Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-03-20 DOI:10.1111/dewb.12448
Rahime Aydin Er, Gülten Çevik Nasirlier
{"title":"调查 COVID-19 大流行期间土耳其稀缺资源的分配情况:医疗保健专业人员优先考虑哪些标准?","authors":"Rahime Aydin Er, Gülten Çevik Nasirlier","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>COVID-19 caused an imbalance between medical resources and the number of patients in Türkiye like in many countries. There was not pandemic-triage system, and this situation led to decision making based on experience, intuition, and judgment of allocation of scarce resources. The research explains the guiding criteria that healthcare professionals used to prioritize the distribution of scarce medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. The criteria preferred by 928 healthcare professionals were evaluated when preventive measures for COVID-19 were reduced and so the number of cases increased rapidly. The results indicate that Turkish healthcare professionals largely support the utilitarian approach, which focuses on medical benefit in pandemic. The main problem was that some criteria not approved in COVID-19 triage guidelines were considered important by healthcare professionals. These criteria, which cause discrimination by preventing the provision of fair and equal medical care to patients, are a prominent issue in the study.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A survey of the allocation of scarce resources in Türkiye during the COVID-19 pandemic: Which criteria did healthcare professionals prioritize?\",\"authors\":\"Rahime Aydin Er, Gülten Çevik Nasirlier\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dewb.12448\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>COVID-19 caused an imbalance between medical resources and the number of patients in Türkiye like in many countries. There was not pandemic-triage system, and this situation led to decision making based on experience, intuition, and judgment of allocation of scarce resources. The research explains the guiding criteria that healthcare professionals used to prioritize the distribution of scarce medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. The criteria preferred by 928 healthcare professionals were evaluated when preventive measures for COVID-19 were reduced and so the number of cases increased rapidly. The results indicate that Turkish healthcare professionals largely support the utilitarian approach, which focuses on medical benefit in pandemic. The main problem was that some criteria not approved in COVID-19 triage guidelines were considered important by healthcare professionals. These criteria, which cause discrimination by preventing the provision of fair and equal medical care to patients, are a prominent issue in the study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50590,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developing World Bioethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developing World Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12448\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developing World Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12448","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与许多国家一样,COVID-19 在土耳其造成了医疗资源与病人数量之间的不平衡。由于没有大流行病分诊系统,在这种情况下,只能根据经验、直觉和判断来决定稀缺资源的分配。研究解释了在 COVID-19 大流行期间,医疗保健专业人员在分配稀缺医疗资源的优先次序时所使用的指导标准。在 COVID-19 预防措施减少、病例数量迅速增加的情况下,对 928 名医疗保健专业人员首选的标准进行了评估。结果表明,土耳其医疗保健专业人员大多支持功利主义方法,即在大流行病中注重医疗效益。主要问题在于,医护人员认为 COVID-19 分诊指南中未批准的一些标准很重要。这些标准造成了歧视,阻碍了为患者提供公平、平等的医疗服务,是研究中的一个突出问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A survey of the allocation of scarce resources in Türkiye during the COVID-19 pandemic: Which criteria did healthcare professionals prioritize?

COVID-19 caused an imbalance between medical resources and the number of patients in Türkiye like in many countries. There was not pandemic-triage system, and this situation led to decision making based on experience, intuition, and judgment of allocation of scarce resources. The research explains the guiding criteria that healthcare professionals used to prioritize the distribution of scarce medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. The criteria preferred by 928 healthcare professionals were evaluated when preventive measures for COVID-19 were reduced and so the number of cases increased rapidly. The results indicate that Turkish healthcare professionals largely support the utilitarian approach, which focuses on medical benefit in pandemic. The main problem was that some criteria not approved in COVID-19 triage guidelines were considered important by healthcare professionals. These criteria, which cause discrimination by preventing the provision of fair and equal medical care to patients, are a prominent issue in the study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Developing World Bioethics
Developing World Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Developing World Bioethics provides long needed case studies, teaching materials, news in brief, and legal backgrounds to bioethics scholars and students in developing and developed countries alike. This companion journal to Bioethics also features high-quality peer reviewed original articles. It is edited by well-known bioethicists who are working in developing countries, yet it will also be open to contributions and commentary from developed countries'' authors. Developing World Bioethics is the only journal in the field dedicated exclusively to developing countries'' bioethics issues. The journal is an essential resource for all those concerned about bioethical issues in the developing world. Members of Ethics Committees in developing countries will highly value a special section dedicated to their work.
期刊最新文献
Ethical analysis of informed consent methods in longitudinal cohort studies: A Chinese perspective Social disharmony, inauthenticity and patriarchy: an Ubuntu perspective on the practice of female genital mutilation. Issue Information Oropouche fever in Brazil: When the time is now Personhood: An emergent view from Africa and the West.
×
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