美国医院的伦理咨询:遵守国家实践标准。

Q1 Arts and Humanities AJOB Empirical Bioethics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-18 DOI:10.1080/23294515.2021.1996118
Anita Tarzian, Ellen Fox, Marion Danis, Christopher C Duke
{"title":"美国医院的伦理咨询:遵守国家实践标准。","authors":"Anita Tarzian,&nbsp;Ellen Fox,&nbsp;Marion Danis,&nbsp;Christopher C Duke","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2021.1996118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>Adherence to widely accepted practice standards is a frequently used measure of healthcare quality. In the U.S., the most widely recognized authoritative source of practice standards for ethics consultation (EC) is the second edition of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities' <i>Core Competencies for Healthcare Ethics Consultation</i> report.<b>Methods</b>To determine the extent to which EC practices in U.S. hospitals adhere to these practice standards, we developed and analyzed 12 evaluative measures from a national survey.<b>Results</b>Only three of the 12 standards achieved over 75% adherence with reported EC practices: allowing anyone involved in a case to request an EC (100%), not requiring an attending physician's permission to conduct an EC (97.6%), and having at least one person on the ethics consultation service (ECS) with advanced level EC proficiency (79.3%).<b>Conclusions</b>Implications are discussed for achieving consensus on EC standards as they continue to evolve.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"10-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethics Consultation in U.S. Hospitals: Adherence to National Practice Standards.\",\"authors\":\"Anita Tarzian,&nbsp;Ellen Fox,&nbsp;Marion Danis,&nbsp;Christopher C Duke\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2021.1996118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>Adherence to widely accepted practice standards is a frequently used measure of healthcare quality. In the U.S., the most widely recognized authoritative source of practice standards for ethics consultation (EC) is the second edition of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities' <i>Core Competencies for Healthcare Ethics Consultation</i> report.<b>Methods</b>To determine the extent to which EC practices in U.S. hospitals adhere to these practice standards, we developed and analyzed 12 evaluative measures from a national survey.<b>Results</b>Only three of the 12 standards achieved over 75% adherence with reported EC practices: allowing anyone involved in a case to request an EC (100%), not requiring an attending physician's permission to conduct an EC (97.6%), and having at least one person on the ethics consultation service (ECS) with advanced level EC proficiency (79.3%).<b>Conclusions</b>Implications are discussed for achieving consensus on EC standards as they continue to evolve.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1996118\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1996118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

背景:遵守广泛接受的实践标准是衡量医疗保健质量的常用标准。在美国,最广泛认可的伦理咨询(EC)实践标准的权威来源是美国生物伦理与人文学会第二版的《医疗保健伦理咨询的核心竞争力》报告。方法为了确定美国医院的EC实践在多大程度上遵守了这些实践标准,我们从一项全国调查中制定并分析了12项评估措施。结果12个标准中只有3个标准达到了75%以上的符合性:允许任何参与病例的人要求进行符合性检查(100%),不需要主治医生的许可进行符合性检查(97.6%),以及至少有一名具有高级符合性检查能力的道德咨询服务(ECS)人员(79.3%)。结论随着EC标准的不断发展,讨论了在EC标准上达成共识的影响。
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
Ethics Consultation in U.S. Hospitals: Adherence to National Practice Standards.

BackgroundAdherence to widely accepted practice standards is a frequently used measure of healthcare quality. In the U.S., the most widely recognized authoritative source of practice standards for ethics consultation (EC) is the second edition of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities' Core Competencies for Healthcare Ethics Consultation report.MethodsTo determine the extent to which EC practices in U.S. hospitals adhere to these practice standards, we developed and analyzed 12 evaluative measures from a national survey.ResultsOnly three of the 12 standards achieved over 75% adherence with reported EC practices: allowing anyone involved in a case to request an EC (100%), not requiring an attending physician's permission to conduct an EC (97.6%), and having at least one person on the ethics consultation service (ECS) with advanced level EC proficiency (79.3%).ConclusionsImplications are discussed for achieving consensus on EC standards as they continue to evolve.

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
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Enhancing Animals is "Still Genetics": Perspectives of Genome Scientists and Policymakers on Animal and Human Enhancement. Associations Between the Legalization and Implementation of Medical Aid in Dying and Suicide Rates in the United States. Ethics Consultation in U.S. Pediatric Hospitals: Adherence to National Practice Standards. Monitored and Cared for at Home? Privacy Concerns When Using Smart Home Health Technologies to Care for Older Persons. Advance Medical Decision-Making Differs Across First- and Third-Person Perspectives.
×
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