Clinical ethics committees in nursing homes: what good can they do? Analysis of a single case consultation.

Case study methods clinical ethics clinical ethics committees clinical ethics support empirical approaches nursing homes

Journal

Nursing ethics
ISSN: 1477-0989
Titre abrégé: Nurs Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9433357

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 14 7 2021
medline: 25 2 2022
entrez: 13 7 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Ought nursing homes to establish clinical ethics committees (CECs)? An answer to this question must begin with an understanding of how a clinical ethics committee might be beneficial in a nursing home context - to patients, next of kin, professionals, managers, and the institution. With the present article, we aim to contribute to such an understanding. We ask, in which ways can clinical ethics committees be helpful to stakeholders in a nursing home context? We describe in depth a clinical ethics committee case consultation deemed successful by stakeholders, then reflect on how it was helpful. Case study using the clinical ethics committee's written case report and self-evaluation form, and two research interviews, as data. The nursing home's ward manager and the patient's son participated in research interviews. Data were collected as part of an implementation study. Clinical ethics committee members and interviewed stakeholders consented to study participation, and also gave specific approval for the publication of the present article. Six different roles played by the clinical ethics committee in the case consultation are described: analyst, advisor, support, moderator, builder of consensus and trust, and disseminator. The case study indicates that clinical ethics committees might sometimes be of help to stakeholders in moral challenges in nursing homes. Demanding moral challenges arise in the nursing home setting. More research is needed to examine whether clinical ethics committees might be suitable as ethics support structures in nursing homes and community care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Ought nursing homes to establish clinical ethics committees (CECs)? An answer to this question must begin with an understanding of how a clinical ethics committee might be beneficial in a nursing home context - to patients, next of kin, professionals, managers, and the institution. With the present article, we aim to contribute to such an understanding.
AIM OBJECTIVE
We ask, in which ways can clinical ethics committees be helpful to stakeholders in a nursing home context? We describe in depth a clinical ethics committee case consultation deemed successful by stakeholders, then reflect on how it was helpful.
RESEARCH DESIGN METHODS
Case study using the clinical ethics committee's written case report and self-evaluation form, and two research interviews, as data.
PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT METHODS
The nursing home's ward manager and the patient's son participated in research interviews.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS METHODS
Data were collected as part of an implementation study. Clinical ethics committee members and interviewed stakeholders consented to study participation, and also gave specific approval for the publication of the present article.
FINDINGS/RESULTS RESULTS
Six different roles played by the clinical ethics committee in the case consultation are described: analyst, advisor, support, moderator, builder of consensus and trust, and disseminator.
DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS
The case study indicates that clinical ethics committees might sometimes be of help to stakeholders in moral challenges in nursing homes.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Demanding moral challenges arise in the nursing home setting. More research is needed to examine whether clinical ethics committees might be suitable as ethics support structures in nursing homes and community care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34254541
doi: 10.1177/09697330211003269
pmc: PMC8866748
doi:

Types de publication

Case Reports Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

94-103

Références

BMC Med Ethics. 2020 Sep 1;21(1):82
pubmed: 32873310
J Med Ethics. 2020 Feb;46(2):66-70
pubmed: 31488518
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Jun 06;16:40
pubmed: 26048681
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020 Dec;21(12):1852-1861.e8
pubmed: 32736991
J Med Ethics. 2006 Oct;32(10):564-6
pubmed: 17012494
Soc Sci Med. 2010 Aug;71(4):677-84
pubmed: 20580142
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2009 Fall;18(4):397-405
pubmed: 19715626
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1988 Feb;36(2):150-6
pubmed: 3339220
BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Nov 8;17(1):70
pubmed: 27825344
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jul 22;7:CD012636
pubmed: 31424106
HEC Forum. 2020 Sep;32(3):253-267
pubmed: 32240442
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Dec 1;18(1):68
pubmed: 29191186
HEC Forum. 2017 Dec;29(4):313-346
pubmed: 28600658
J Long Term Care Adm. 1994 Fall;22(3):25-8
pubmed: 10139527
Nurs Ethics. 2015 Dec;22(8):870-80
pubmed: 25542405
Nurs Ethics. 2021 Mar;28(2):210-220
pubmed: 32729357

Auteurs

Heidi Karlsen (H)

Centre for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Norway.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH