利用共生实证伦理学探索关系对临床伦理学的意义:重置伦理学研究项目的发现。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-05-28 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01053-9
Caroline A B Redhead, Lucy Frith, Anna Chiumento, Sara Fovargue, Heather Draper
{"title":"利用共生实证伦理学探索关系对临床伦理学的意义:重置伦理学研究项目的发现。","authors":"Caroline A B Redhead, Lucy Frith, Anna Chiumento, Sara Fovargue, Heather Draper","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01053-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>At the beginning of the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, many non-Covid healthcare services were suspended. In April 2020, the Department of Health in England mandated that non-Covid services should resume, alongside the continuing pandemic response. This 'resetting' of healthcare services created a unique context in which it became critical to consider how ethical considerations did (and should) underpin decisions about integrating infection control measures into routine healthcare practices. We draw on data collected as part of the 'NHS Reset Ethics' project, which explored the everyday ethical challenges of resetting England's NHS maternity and paediatrics services during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthcare professionals and members of the public participated in interviews and focus group discussions. The qualitative methods are reported in detail elsewhere. The focus of this article is our use of Frith's symbiotic empirical ethics methodology to work from our empirical findings towards the normative suggestion that clinical ethics should explicitly attend to the importance of relationships in clinical practice. This methodology uses a five-step approach to refine and develop ethical theory based on a naturalist account of ethics that sees practice and theory as symbiotically related.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Reset project data showed that changed working practices caused ethical challenges for healthcare professionals, and that infection prevention and control measures represented harmful barriers to the experience of receiving and offering care. For healthcare professionals, offering care as part of a relational interaction was an ethically important dimension of healthcare delivery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that foregrounding the importance of relationships across a hospital community will better promote the ethically important multi-directional expression of caring between healthcare professionals, patients, and their families. We offer two suggestions for making progress towards such a relational approach. First, that there is a change of emphasis in clinical ethics practice to explicitly acknowledge the importance of the relationships (including with their healthcare team) within which the patient is held. Second, that organisational decision-making should take into account the moral significance afforded to caring relationships by healthcare professionals, and the role such relationships can play in the negotiation of ethical challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11131179/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using symbiotic empirical ethics to explore the significance of relationships to clinical ethics: findings from the Reset Ethics research project.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline A B Redhead, Lucy Frith, Anna Chiumento, Sara Fovargue, Heather Draper\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-024-01053-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>At the beginning of the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, many non-Covid healthcare services were suspended. In April 2020, the Department of Health in England mandated that non-Covid services should resume, alongside the continuing pandemic response. This 'resetting' of healthcare services created a unique context in which it became critical to consider how ethical considerations did (and should) underpin decisions about integrating infection control measures into routine healthcare practices. We draw on data collected as part of the 'NHS Reset Ethics' project, which explored the everyday ethical challenges of resetting England's NHS maternity and paediatrics services during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthcare professionals and members of the public participated in interviews and focus group discussions. The qualitative methods are reported in detail elsewhere. The focus of this article is our use of Frith's symbiotic empirical ethics methodology to work from our empirical findings towards the normative suggestion that clinical ethics should explicitly attend to the importance of relationships in clinical practice. This methodology uses a five-step approach to refine and develop ethical theory based on a naturalist account of ethics that sees practice and theory as symbiotically related.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Reset project data showed that changed working practices caused ethical challenges for healthcare professionals, and that infection prevention and control measures represented harmful barriers to the experience of receiving and offering care. For healthcare professionals, offering care as part of a relational interaction was an ethically important dimension of healthcare delivery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that foregrounding the importance of relationships across a hospital community will better promote the ethically important multi-directional expression of caring between healthcare professionals, patients, and their families. We offer two suggestions for making progress towards such a relational approach. First, that there is a change of emphasis in clinical ethics practice to explicitly acknowledge the importance of the relationships (including with their healthcare team) within which the patient is held. Second, that organisational decision-making should take into account the moral significance afforded to caring relationships by healthcare professionals, and the role such relationships can play in the negotiation of ethical challenges.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11131179/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01053-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01053-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:冠状病毒(Covid-19)大流行之初,许多非冠状病毒医疗保健服务被暂停。2020 年 4 月,英格兰卫生部规定,在继续开展大流行应对工作的同时,应恢复非 Covid 服务。医疗保健服务的 "重启 "创造了一个独特的环境,在此环境下,考虑如何(以及应该)将伦理因素作为将感染控制措施纳入常规医疗保健实践的决策依据变得至关重要。我们借鉴了 "英国国家医疗服务系统重设伦理 "项目中收集的数据,该项目探讨了大流行期间英国国家医疗服务系统重设产科和儿科服务所面临的日常伦理挑战。有关定性方法的详细报道见其他章节。本文的重点是我们使用弗雷斯的共生经验伦理学方法论,从我们的经验发现出发,提出规范性建议,即临床伦理学应明确关注临床实践中人际关系的重要性。该方法论采用五步方法来完善和发展伦理学理论,其基础是将实践与理论视为共生关系的自然主义伦理学论述:Reset 项目数据显示,工作实践的改变给医护人员带来了伦理挑战,感染预防和控制措施对接受和提供护理的体验构成了有害障碍。对医护人员而言,提供护理是关系互动的一部分,是提供医疗服务的一个重要伦理维度:我们的研究结果表明,强调医院社区关系的重要性将更好地促进医护人员、患者及其家属之间在伦理上重要的多向关怀表达。我们提出了两点建议,以便在采用这种关系方法方面取得进展。第一,改变临床伦理实践的重点,明确承认病人所处关系(包括与医护团队的关系)的重要性。其次,组织决策应考虑到医护专业人员对关爱关系所赋予的道德意义,以及这种关系在应对伦理挑战的谈判中所能发挥的作用。
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
Using symbiotic empirical ethics to explore the significance of relationships to clinical ethics: findings from the Reset Ethics research project.

Background: At the beginning of the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, many non-Covid healthcare services were suspended. In April 2020, the Department of Health in England mandated that non-Covid services should resume, alongside the continuing pandemic response. This 'resetting' of healthcare services created a unique context in which it became critical to consider how ethical considerations did (and should) underpin decisions about integrating infection control measures into routine healthcare practices. We draw on data collected as part of the 'NHS Reset Ethics' project, which explored the everyday ethical challenges of resetting England's NHS maternity and paediatrics services during the pandemic.

Methods: Healthcare professionals and members of the public participated in interviews and focus group discussions. The qualitative methods are reported in detail elsewhere. The focus of this article is our use of Frith's symbiotic empirical ethics methodology to work from our empirical findings towards the normative suggestion that clinical ethics should explicitly attend to the importance of relationships in clinical practice. This methodology uses a five-step approach to refine and develop ethical theory based on a naturalist account of ethics that sees practice and theory as symbiotically related.

Results: The Reset project data showed that changed working practices caused ethical challenges for healthcare professionals, and that infection prevention and control measures represented harmful barriers to the experience of receiving and offering care. For healthcare professionals, offering care as part of a relational interaction was an ethically important dimension of healthcare delivery.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that foregrounding the importance of relationships across a hospital community will better promote the ethically important multi-directional expression of caring between healthcare professionals, patients, and their families. We offer two suggestions for making progress towards such a relational approach. First, that there is a change of emphasis in clinical ethics practice to explicitly acknowledge the importance of the relationships (including with their healthcare team) within which the patient is held. Second, that organisational decision-making should take into account the moral significance afforded to caring relationships by healthcare professionals, and the role such relationships can play in the negotiation of ethical challenges.

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
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
From ontological to relational: A scoping review of conceptions of dignity invoked in deliberations on medically assisted death Putting patients first: when home-based care staff prioritise loyalty to patients above the system and themselves. An ethnographic study Encompassing trust in medical AI from the perspective of medical students: a quantitative comparative study. Impact of the life-sustaining treatment decision act on organ donation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in South Korea: a multi-centre retrospective study. Opportunities and challenges of a dynamic consent-based application: personalized options for personal health data sharing and utilization.
×
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