Ethical climate in contemporary paediatric intensive care.

children ethics committees/consultation health care for specific diseases/groups health personnel interests of health personnel/institutions

Journal

Journal of medical ethics
ISSN: 1473-4257
Titre abrégé: J Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7513619

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Jan 2021
Historique:
received: 19 08 2020
revised: 27 11 2020
accepted: 03 12 2020
entrez: 12 1 2021
pubmed: 13 1 2021
medline: 13 1 2021
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Ethical climate (EC) has been broadly described as how well institutions respond to ethical issues. Developing a tool to study and evaluate EC that aims to achieve sustained improvements requires a contemporary framework with identified relevant drivers. An extensive literature review was performed, reviewing existing EC definitions, tools and areas where EC has been studied; ethical challenges and relevance of EC in contemporary paediatric intensive care (PIC); and relevant ethical theories. We surmised that existing EC definitions and tools designed to measure it fail to capture nuances of the PIC environment, and sought to address existing gaps by developing an EC framework for PIC founded on ethical theory. In this article, we propose a Paediatric Intensive Care Ethical Climate (PICEC) conceptual framework and four measurable domains to be captured by an assessment tool. We define PICEC as the collective felt experience of interdisciplinary team members arising from those factors that enable or constrain their ability to navigate ethical aspects of their work. PICEC both results from and is influenced by how well ethical issues are understood, identified, explored, reflected on, responded to and addressed in the workplace. PICEC encompasses four, core inter-related domains representing drivers of EC including: (1) organisational culture and leadership; (2) interdisciplinary team relationships and dynamics; (3) integrated child and family-centred care; and (4) ethics literacy. Future directions involve developing a PICEC measurement tool, with implications for benchmarking as well as guidance for, and evaluation of, targeted interventions to foster a healthy EC.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33431646
pii: medethics-2020-106818
doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106818
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Auteurs

Katie M Moynihan (KM)

Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA katie.moynihan@cardio.chboston.org.
Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Lisa Taylor (L)

Office of Ethics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Liz Crowe (L)

Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Queensland Children's Hospital, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Mary-Claire Balnaves (MC)

School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Helen Irving (H)

School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Centre for Children's Health Ethics and Law, Children's Health Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Al Ozonoff (A)

Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Division of Infectious Diseases, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Robert D Truog (RD)

Center for Bioethics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Melanie Jansen (M)

School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.

Classifications MeSH