Andrew Hantel, Emily Senay, Cristina Richie, Anna Revette, Brett Nava-Coulter, Fay J. Hlubocky, Thomas P. Walsh, Mark Siegler, Gregory A. Abel
{"title":"关于根据气候做出健康决策过程中的伦理问题的焦点小组研究","authors":"Andrew Hantel, Emily Senay, Cristina Richie, Anna Revette, Brett Nava-Coulter, Fay J. Hlubocky, Thomas P. Walsh, Mark Siegler, Gregory A. Abel","doi":"10.1038/s41558-024-02121-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Healthcare delivery contributes to carbon emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated health impacts. There is limited understanding of stakeholder views regarding ethical issues at the intersection of health choices and environmental impact. Here we performed a qualitative study involving seven focus groups with 46 participants who were patients and physicians in the northeastern US health systems. Both patients and physicians were amenable to health decisions that are beneficial for the environment and health. A consumptive healthcare system impeded both groups’ assumption of health-related climate responsibilities. Physicians, however, underestimated patients’ interest in discussing the environmental impacts of health decisions. Patients expressed tension between a personal interest in limiting climate change through health choices and ensuring others were also accountable; they were also concerned that physician paternalism might impede climate-informed health conversations. These findings outline barriers to climate-informed healthcare and begin to establish how they can be addressed. Healthcare emissions negatively affect the environment and health, posing ethical questions between health and environmental impacts. A focus group study in US health systems revealed a willingness to make environmentally informed health decisions and identified barriers to making such decisions.","PeriodicalId":18974,"journal":{"name":"Nature Climate Change","volume":"14 10","pages":"1040-1046"},"PeriodicalIF":29.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A focus group study of ethical issues during climate-informed health decision-making\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Hantel, Emily Senay, Cristina Richie, Anna Revette, Brett Nava-Coulter, Fay J. Hlubocky, Thomas P. Walsh, Mark Siegler, Gregory A. Abel\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41558-024-02121-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Healthcare delivery contributes to carbon emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated health impacts. There is limited understanding of stakeholder views regarding ethical issues at the intersection of health choices and environmental impact. Here we performed a qualitative study involving seven focus groups with 46 participants who were patients and physicians in the northeastern US health systems. Both patients and physicians were amenable to health decisions that are beneficial for the environment and health. A consumptive healthcare system impeded both groups’ assumption of health-related climate responsibilities. Physicians, however, underestimated patients’ interest in discussing the environmental impacts of health decisions. Patients expressed tension between a personal interest in limiting climate change through health choices and ensuring others were also accountable; they were also concerned that physician paternalism might impede climate-informed health conversations. These findings outline barriers to climate-informed healthcare and begin to establish how they can be addressed. Healthcare emissions negatively affect the environment and health, posing ethical questions between health and environmental impacts. A focus group study in US health systems revealed a willingness to make environmentally informed health decisions and identified barriers to making such decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Climate Change\",\"volume\":\"14 10\",\"pages\":\"1040-1046\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":29.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Climate Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02121-z\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02121-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
A focus group study of ethical issues during climate-informed health decision-making
Healthcare delivery contributes to carbon emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated health impacts. There is limited understanding of stakeholder views regarding ethical issues at the intersection of health choices and environmental impact. Here we performed a qualitative study involving seven focus groups with 46 participants who were patients and physicians in the northeastern US health systems. Both patients and physicians were amenable to health decisions that are beneficial for the environment and health. A consumptive healthcare system impeded both groups’ assumption of health-related climate responsibilities. Physicians, however, underestimated patients’ interest in discussing the environmental impacts of health decisions. Patients expressed tension between a personal interest in limiting climate change through health choices and ensuring others were also accountable; they were also concerned that physician paternalism might impede climate-informed health conversations. These findings outline barriers to climate-informed healthcare and begin to establish how they can be addressed. Healthcare emissions negatively affect the environment and health, posing ethical questions between health and environmental impacts. A focus group study in US health systems revealed a willingness to make environmentally informed health decisions and identified barriers to making such decisions.
期刊介绍:
Nature Climate Change is dedicated to addressing the scientific challenge of understanding Earth's changing climate and its societal implications. As a monthly journal, it publishes significant and cutting-edge research on the nature, causes, and impacts of global climate change, as well as its implications for the economy, policy, and the world at large.
The journal publishes original research spanning the natural and social sciences, synthesizing interdisciplinary research to provide a comprehensive understanding of climate change. It upholds the high standards set by all Nature-branded journals, ensuring top-tier original research through a fair and rigorous review process, broad readership access, high standards of copy editing and production, rapid publication, and independence from academic societies and other vested interests.
Nature Climate Change serves as a platform for discussion among experts, publishing opinion, analysis, and review articles. It also features Research Highlights to highlight important developments in the field and original reporting from renowned science journalists in the form of feature articles.
Topics covered in the journal include adaptation, atmospheric science, ecology, economics, energy, impacts and vulnerability, mitigation, oceanography, policy, sociology, and sustainability, among others.