从伦理角度转化治疗意识障碍的先进神经技术:临床医生观点调查》。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurocritical Care Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1007/s12028-024-02147-3
Twisha Bhardwaj, Brian L Edlow, Michael J Young
{"title":"从伦理角度转化治疗意识障碍的先进神经技术:临床医生观点调查》。","authors":"Twisha Bhardwaj, Brian L Edlow, Michael J Young","doi":"10.1007/s12028-024-02147-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although evaluation of disorders of consciousness (DoC) following brain injury has traditionally relied on bedside behavioral examination, advances in neurotechnology have elucidated novel approaches to detecting and predicting recovery of consciousness. Professional society guidelines now recommend that clinicians integrate these neurotechnologies into clinical practice as part of multimodal evaluations for some patients with DoC but have not crafted concrete protocols for this translation. Little is known about the experiences and ethical perspectives held by key stakeholder groups around the clinical implementation of advanced neurotechnologies to detect and predict recovery of consciousness. Recognizing this knowledge gap, the Data-Driven Neuroethics for Consciousness Detection (DECODE) survey examined clinicians' perspectives on advanced neurotechnologies for DoC care, including access to and rates of adoption, perceived utility, facilitators and barriers to adoption in clinical settings, ethical considerations surrounding clinical implementation, and challenges encountered in ensuring care for patients with acute and prolonged DoC. Mixed-methods analysis including qualitative analysis, grounded theory methodology, and ethical analysis was employed to assess responses and key themes. Ninety-two clinicians consented to the survey. More than 70% believed that standard bedside behavioral examination is insufficient, and nearly 60% viewed advanced neurotechnologies as integral in optimal DoC evaluation. Training gaps and limited institutional infrastructure were identified as salient barriers to clinical implementation. Thematic analysis revealed concerns about the interpretation of results, impact on surrogates, and validity of test results. Ethical themes of prognostic uncertainty, nihilism, and access also permeated multiple domains. Considerations surrounding access, knowledge base, results interpretation, and communication with surrogates are cross-cutting ethical threads shaping the clinical translation of advanced neurotechnologies for DoC. These components represent opportunities for implementation science work focused on democratizing access to neurotechnologies, educating clinicians on the use of novel techniques and interpretation of results, conducting multisite validation studies, and standardizing approaches to communicating test results.</p>","PeriodicalId":19118,"journal":{"name":"Neurocritical Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethically Translating Advanced Neurotechnologies for Disorders of Consciousness: A Survey of Clinicians' Perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Twisha Bhardwaj, Brian L Edlow, Michael J Young\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12028-024-02147-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Although evaluation of disorders of consciousness (DoC) following brain injury has traditionally relied on bedside behavioral examination, advances in neurotechnology have elucidated novel approaches to detecting and predicting recovery of consciousness. Professional society guidelines now recommend that clinicians integrate these neurotechnologies into clinical practice as part of multimodal evaluations for some patients with DoC but have not crafted concrete protocols for this translation. Little is known about the experiences and ethical perspectives held by key stakeholder groups around the clinical implementation of advanced neurotechnologies to detect and predict recovery of consciousness. Recognizing this knowledge gap, the Data-Driven Neuroethics for Consciousness Detection (DECODE) survey examined clinicians' perspectives on advanced neurotechnologies for DoC care, including access to and rates of adoption, perceived utility, facilitators and barriers to adoption in clinical settings, ethical considerations surrounding clinical implementation, and challenges encountered in ensuring care for patients with acute and prolonged DoC. Mixed-methods analysis including qualitative analysis, grounded theory methodology, and ethical analysis was employed to assess responses and key themes. Ninety-two clinicians consented to the survey. More than 70% believed that standard bedside behavioral examination is insufficient, and nearly 60% viewed advanced neurotechnologies as integral in optimal DoC evaluation. Training gaps and limited institutional infrastructure were identified as salient barriers to clinical implementation. Thematic analysis revealed concerns about the interpretation of results, impact on surrogates, and validity of test results. Ethical themes of prognostic uncertainty, nihilism, and access also permeated multiple domains. Considerations surrounding access, knowledge base, results interpretation, and communication with surrogates are cross-cutting ethical threads shaping the clinical translation of advanced neurotechnologies for DoC. These components represent opportunities for implementation science work focused on democratizing access to neurotechnologies, educating clinicians on the use of novel techniques and interpretation of results, conducting multisite validation studies, and standardizing approaches to communicating test results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurocritical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurocritical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02147-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocritical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02147-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管对脑损伤后意识障碍(DoC)的评估传统上依赖于床边行为检查,但神经技术的进步已经阐明了检测和预测意识恢复的新方法。目前,专业协会的指南建议临床医生将这些神经技术融入临床实践,作为对部分意识障碍患者进行多模态评估的一部分,但尚未制定出具体的转化方案。人们对主要利益相关群体在临床应用先进神经技术检测和预测意识恢复方面的经验和伦理观点知之甚少。意识检测的数据驱动神经伦理学(DECODE)调查认识到了这一知识空白,调查研究了临床医生对用于意识障碍治疗的先进神经技术的看法,包括获得和采用率、感知效用、临床环境中采用的促进因素和障碍、临床实施的伦理学考虑因素,以及在确保急性和长期意识障碍患者的治疗过程中遇到的挑战。我们采用了混合方法分析(包括定性分析、基础理论方法和伦理分析)来评估答复和关键主题。92 名临床医生同意接受调查。超过 70% 的临床医生认为标准的床边行为检查是不够的,近 60% 的临床医生认为先进的神经技术是最佳昏迷评估不可或缺的一部分。培训缺口和有限的机构基础设施被认为是临床实施的突出障碍。主题分析表明,人们对结果的解释、对代用体的影响以及测试结果的有效性表示担忧。预后不确定性、虚无主义和可及性等伦理主题也渗透到多个领域。围绕获取、知识库、结果解释以及与代理者沟通的考虑因素是贯穿各领域的伦理主线,影响着将先进的神经技术应用于 DoC 的临床转化。这些内容为实施科学工作提供了机会,实施科学工作的重点是使神经技术的获取途径民主化、教育临床医生如何使用新技术和解释结果、开展多站点验证研究,以及使测试结果的交流方法标准化。
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
Ethically Translating Advanced Neurotechnologies for Disorders of Consciousness: A Survey of Clinicians' Perspectives.

Although evaluation of disorders of consciousness (DoC) following brain injury has traditionally relied on bedside behavioral examination, advances in neurotechnology have elucidated novel approaches to detecting and predicting recovery of consciousness. Professional society guidelines now recommend that clinicians integrate these neurotechnologies into clinical practice as part of multimodal evaluations for some patients with DoC but have not crafted concrete protocols for this translation. Little is known about the experiences and ethical perspectives held by key stakeholder groups around the clinical implementation of advanced neurotechnologies to detect and predict recovery of consciousness. Recognizing this knowledge gap, the Data-Driven Neuroethics for Consciousness Detection (DECODE) survey examined clinicians' perspectives on advanced neurotechnologies for DoC care, including access to and rates of adoption, perceived utility, facilitators and barriers to adoption in clinical settings, ethical considerations surrounding clinical implementation, and challenges encountered in ensuring care for patients with acute and prolonged DoC. Mixed-methods analysis including qualitative analysis, grounded theory methodology, and ethical analysis was employed to assess responses and key themes. Ninety-two clinicians consented to the survey. More than 70% believed that standard bedside behavioral examination is insufficient, and nearly 60% viewed advanced neurotechnologies as integral in optimal DoC evaluation. Training gaps and limited institutional infrastructure were identified as salient barriers to clinical implementation. Thematic analysis revealed concerns about the interpretation of results, impact on surrogates, and validity of test results. Ethical themes of prognostic uncertainty, nihilism, and access also permeated multiple domains. Considerations surrounding access, knowledge base, results interpretation, and communication with surrogates are cross-cutting ethical threads shaping the clinical translation of advanced neurotechnologies for DoC. These components represent opportunities for implementation science work focused on democratizing access to neurotechnologies, educating clinicians on the use of novel techniques and interpretation of results, conducting multisite validation studies, and standardizing approaches to communicating test results.

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
Neurocritical Care
Neurocritical Care 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.60%
发文量
221
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurocritical Care is a peer reviewed scientific publication whose major goal is to disseminate new knowledge on all aspects of acute neurological care. It is directed towards neurosurgeons, neuro-intensivists, neurologists, anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, and critical care nurses treating patients with urgent neurologic disorders. These are conditions that may potentially evolve rapidly and could need immediate medical or surgical intervention. Neurocritical Care provides a comprehensive overview of current developments in intensive care neurology, neurosurgery and neuroanesthesia and includes information about new therapeutic avenues and technological innovations. Neurocritical Care is the official journal of the Neurocritical Care Society.
期刊最新文献
Proceedings of the Sixth Regional Neurocritical Care Meeting in the Middle East and Africa in Conjunction with the Kuwait 12th Critical Care Conference. Ketamine Versus Midazolam as the First-Line Continuous Infusion for Status Epilepticus in Children with Cardiac Disease. Low-Cost Strategies for the Development of Neurocritical Care in Resource-Limited Settings. Predisposing Factors of Progression from Refractory Status Epilepticus to Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus in ICU-Admitted Patients: Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study in a Resource-Limited Setting. Description of STRIVE-ON Study Protocol: Safety and Tolerability of GTX-104 (Nimodipine Injection for IV Infusion) Compared with Oral Nimodipine in Patients Hospitalized for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (aSAH): A Prospective, Randomized, Phase III Trial (STRIVE-ON).
×
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