Top Ethical Issues Concerning Healthcare Providers Working in Saudi Arabia.
Ethics
Saudi Arabia
bioethics
ethical dilemma
ethical issues
health care
health care professionals
Journal
Journal of epidemiology and global health
ISSN: 2210-6014
Titre abrégé: J Epidemiol Glob Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101592084
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
received:
30
05
2019
accepted:
20
10
2019
entrez:
16
6
2020
pubmed:
17
6
2020
medline:
21
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Healthcare providers working in Saudi Arabia come from various nationalities, cultures, and training backgrounds. This study aimed to assess the perceptions of healthcare providers working in Riyadh hospitals about ethical dilemmas and solutions. This is a cross-sectional study among physicians working in Riyadh's private and governmental hospitals between June and December 2017. The study collected information on demographics, knowledge about medical ethics, the sources of such knowledge, and common ethical issues in general and the top ethical issues and dilemmas encountered in their daily practice. A total of 455 physicians from government and private hospitals were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the participants was 34.29 ± 10.5 years, females were 29.7% and mean years of practice was 13.0 ± 11.5. The top ethical issues identified by the participants were "disagreement with the patients' relatives about treatment" (91%), patient disagreement with decisions made by professionals (84%), treating the incompetent patient (79%), conflict with administration policy and procedures (77%), scarcity of resources (72%), and making decision about do-not-resuscitate or life-sustaining treatment (68%). There were significant differences in dealing with ethical issues in relation to gender, confidence about ethical knowledge, nationality, seniority, training site, and private or government hospitals academic and nonacademic. Healthcare providers in Riyadh hospitals face multiple ethical challenges. In addition to improvement in ethics knowledge through educational program among healthcare professional, there is a valid need for healthcare professionals and other sectors within society to engage in serious and continuous dialogue to address these issues and propose recommendations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Healthcare providers working in Saudi Arabia come from various nationalities, cultures, and training backgrounds. This study aimed to assess the perceptions of healthcare providers working in Riyadh hospitals about ethical dilemmas and solutions.
METHODS
This is a cross-sectional study among physicians working in Riyadh's private and governmental hospitals between June and December 2017. The study collected information on demographics, knowledge about medical ethics, the sources of such knowledge, and common ethical issues in general and the top ethical issues and dilemmas encountered in their daily practice.
RESULTS
A total of 455 physicians from government and private hospitals were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the participants was 34.29 ± 10.5 years, females were 29.7% and mean years of practice was 13.0 ± 11.5. The top ethical issues identified by the participants were "disagreement with the patients' relatives about treatment" (91%), patient disagreement with decisions made by professionals (84%), treating the incompetent patient (79%), conflict with administration policy and procedures (77%), scarcity of resources (72%), and making decision about do-not-resuscitate or life-sustaining treatment (68%). There were significant differences in dealing with ethical issues in relation to gender, confidence about ethical knowledge, nationality, seniority, training site, and private or government hospitals academic and nonacademic.
CONCLUSION
Healthcare providers in Riyadh hospitals face multiple ethical challenges. In addition to improvement in ethics knowledge through educational program among healthcare professional, there is a valid need for healthcare professionals and other sectors within society to engage in serious and continuous dialogue to address these issues and propose recommendations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32538030
pii: j10/2/143
doi: 10.2991/jegh.k.191211.001
pmc: PMC7310778
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
143-152Informations de copyright
© 2020 Atlantis Press International B.V.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.
Références
Saudi Med J. 1999 Feb;20(2):189-96
pubmed: 27605145
Bioethics. 1993 Apr;7(2-3):97-107
pubmed: 11651542
Indian J Med Ethics. 2009 Oct-Dec;6(4):194-7
pubmed: 19839543
HEC Forum. 1993 May;5(3):144-64
pubmed: 10127439
J Med Ethics. 2005 Jan;31(1):7-14
pubmed: 15634746
Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2009 Mar;20(2):232-9
pubmed: 19237810
J Relig Health. 2014 Oct;53(5):1374-81
pubmed: 23690131
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Jun;16(6):412-8
pubmed: 11422639
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jun;34(6):450-5
pubmed: 18511618
J Med Ethics. 2007 Jan;33(1):51-7
pubmed: 17209113
J Family Community Med. 2012 Jan;19(1):1-6
pubmed: 22518351
Nurs Ethics. 2011 Jan;18(1):9-19
pubmed: 21285193
J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Mar;19(3):251-8
pubmed: 15009780
Avicenna J Med. 2013 Jul;3(3):57-62
pubmed: 24251232
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2009 Apr-May;26(2):119-27
pubmed: 19213927
Med J Aust. 1994 Jan 17;160(2):63-5
pubmed: 8309370
J Med Ethics. 1996 Oct;22(5):282-5
pubmed: 8910780
J Relig Health. 2017 Apr;56(2):400-410
pubmed: 26797682
Bioethics Forum. 2000 Fall;16(3):27-32
pubmed: 12528728
J Family Community Med. 2010 Jan;17(1):41-5
pubmed: 22022670
J Med Ethics. 2010 Nov;36(11):677-82
pubmed: 20739708
Arch Intern Med. 1981 Jul;141(8):1062-4
pubmed: 7247591
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2012 Jan;40(1):137-41
pubmed: 22313074
J Gen Intern Med. 1991 Sep-Oct;6(5):424-9
pubmed: 1744757
Singapore Med J. 2007 Jun;48(6):559-65
pubmed: 17538757
Singapore Med J. 2012 Jan;53(1):11-6
pubmed: 22252176
BMC Med Ethics. 2005 Jun 26;6:E5
pubmed: 15978136
J Med Ethics. 2017 Sep;43(9):606-612
pubmed: 27974470
Indian J Med Ethics. 2005 Jul-Sep;2(3):94-6
pubmed: 16276659
J Med Ethics. 1999 Feb;25(1):51-6
pubmed: 10070640
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2016 Mar 14;7:165-70
pubmed: 27051329
Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2010 May;21(3):447-53
pubmed: 20427867
J Med Ethics. 2000 Aug;26(4):254-60
pubmed: 10951920
Niger Med J. 2012 Oct;53(4):226-30
pubmed: 23661883
West Indian Med J. 2006 Jan;55(1):42-7
pubmed: 16755819
Nurs Ethics. 2002 Mar;9(2):155-78
pubmed: 11944206