The duty of confidentiality during family involvement: ethical challenges and possible solutions in the treatment of persons with psychotic disorders.
Confidentiality
Ethical challenges
Ethics
Facilitators
Family involvement
Health services research
Severe mental illness
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 12 2022
20 12 2022
Historique:
received:
16
07
2022
accepted:
09
12
2022
entrez:
20
12
2022
pubmed:
21
12
2022
medline:
23
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Family involvement during severe mental illness is still poorly implemented, contrary to evidence-based recommendations. Confidentiality issues are among the most prominent barriers, with mental health professionals facing complex ethical, legal, and practical challenges. However, research focusing on this barrier is very sparse. Nested within a cluster-randomised trial to implement guidelines on family involvement for persons with psychotic disorders in community mental health centres, the aim of this sub-study was to explore ethical challenges related to the duty of confidentiality as experienced by mental health professionals, and to explore key measures that might contribute to improving the handling of such challenges. In total 75 participants participated in 21 semi-structured focus groups, including implementation team members at the initial and late phase of the intervention period and clinicians who were not on the implementation teams, at late phase of implementation. We used purposive sampling and manifest content analysis to explore participants' experiences and change processes. Ethical challenges related to the duty of confidentiality included 1) Uncertainty in how to apply the legislation, 2) Patient autonomy versus a less strict interpretation of the duty of confidentiality, 3) Patient alliance and beneficence versus a less strict interpretation of the duty of confidentiality, 4) How to deal with uncertainty regarding what relatives know about the patients' illness, and 5) Relatives' interests versus the duty of confidentiality. Measures to facilitate better handling of the duty of confidentiality included 1) Training and practice in family involvement, and 2) Standardisation of family involvement practices. When health professionals gained competence in and positive experiences with family involvement, this led to vital changes in how they interpreted and practiced the duty of confidentiality in their ethical reasoning and in clinical practice. Especially, the need to provide sufficient information to the patients about family involvement became evident during the study. To improve the handling of confidentiality issues, professionals should receive training in family involvement and confidentiality statutes followed by practice. Furthermore, family involvement should be standardised, and confidentiality guidelines should be implemented in the mental health services. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03869177. Registered 11.03.19.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Family involvement during severe mental illness is still poorly implemented, contrary to evidence-based recommendations. Confidentiality issues are among the most prominent barriers, with mental health professionals facing complex ethical, legal, and practical challenges. However, research focusing on this barrier is very sparse. Nested within a cluster-randomised trial to implement guidelines on family involvement for persons with psychotic disorders in community mental health centres, the aim of this sub-study was to explore ethical challenges related to the duty of confidentiality as experienced by mental health professionals, and to explore key measures that might contribute to improving the handling of such challenges.
METHODS
In total 75 participants participated in 21 semi-structured focus groups, including implementation team members at the initial and late phase of the intervention period and clinicians who were not on the implementation teams, at late phase of implementation. We used purposive sampling and manifest content analysis to explore participants' experiences and change processes.
RESULTS
Ethical challenges related to the duty of confidentiality included 1) Uncertainty in how to apply the legislation, 2) Patient autonomy versus a less strict interpretation of the duty of confidentiality, 3) Patient alliance and beneficence versus a less strict interpretation of the duty of confidentiality, 4) How to deal with uncertainty regarding what relatives know about the patients' illness, and 5) Relatives' interests versus the duty of confidentiality. Measures to facilitate better handling of the duty of confidentiality included 1) Training and practice in family involvement, and 2) Standardisation of family involvement practices.
CONCLUSION
When health professionals gained competence in and positive experiences with family involvement, this led to vital changes in how they interpreted and practiced the duty of confidentiality in their ethical reasoning and in clinical practice. Especially, the need to provide sufficient information to the patients about family involvement became evident during the study. To improve the handling of confidentiality issues, professionals should receive training in family involvement and confidentiality statutes followed by practice. Furthermore, family involvement should be standardised, and confidentiality guidelines should be implemented in the mental health services.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03869177. Registered 11.03.19.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36539741
doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-04461-6
pii: 10.1186/s12888-022-04461-6
pmc: PMC9764492
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03869177']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
812Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107-15
pubmed: 18352969
World Psychiatry. 2011 Oct;10(3):229-36
pubmed: 21991284
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2015 Feb;61(1):10-6
pubmed: 24869849
Fam Process. 2016 Sep;55(3):460-82
pubmed: 27411376
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Sep 12;22(1):1153
pubmed: 36096844
Health Serv Res. 1999 Dec;34(5 Pt 2):1189-208
pubmed: 10591279
Intern Med J. 2009 Sep;39(9):582-7
pubmed: 19619218
Br J Psychiatry. 1997 Nov;171:401-5
pubmed: 9463594
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007;44(6):801-11
pubmed: 18075938
Qual Health Res. 2014 Oct;24(10):1368-80
pubmed: 25147222
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 May 15;17(1):349
pubmed: 28506296
Clin Psychol Rev. 2013 Apr;33(3):372-82
pubmed: 23410719
Ir J Med Sci. 2015 Dec;184(4):781-90
pubmed: 25018144
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2016 May;50(5):410-72
pubmed: 27106681
Afr J Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;7(3):93-99
pubmed: 30456117
Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 2001;(410):96-101
pubmed: 11863059
BMC Med Ethics. 2020 Jun 30;21(1):50
pubmed: 32605569
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Oct 9;21(1):1073
pubmed: 34627245
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2019 Nov;51(6):680-688
pubmed: 31697045
Psychol Psychother. 2015 Mar;88(1):105-19
pubmed: 24623726
BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Aug 29;15:208
pubmed: 26319602
BMC Psychiatry. 2021 Jun 2;21(1):285
pubmed: 34078306
Psychiatr Serv. 2000 Aug;51(8):1006-11
pubmed: 10913453
BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Nov 24;17(1):76
pubmed: 27881139
Qual Health Res. 2008 Nov;18(11):1556-65
pubmed: 18849516
Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Feb;190:148-55
pubmed: 17267932
Psychiatr Serv. 2003 Dec;54(12):1622-8
pubmed: 14645802
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Feb;21 Suppl 2:S1-8
pubmed: 16637954
Nurs Ethics. 2013 Feb;20(1):96-108
pubmed: 22918061
BMJ Open. 2014 Oct 03;4(10):e006108
pubmed: 25280809
Lancet Psychiatry. 2022 Mar;9(3):211-221
pubmed: 35093198
J Clin Nurs. 2012 Jan;21(1-2):224-31
pubmed: 21895815
Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105-12
pubmed: 14769454
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Oct 9;20(1):934
pubmed: 33036605
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Sep;42(5):533-44
pubmed: 24193818
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Dec 08;(12):CD000088
pubmed: 21154340
Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 Nov;8(11):969-980
pubmed: 34653393
Health Soc Care Community. 2008 Jul;16(4):378-87
pubmed: 18194286
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Mar 21;17(1):101
pubmed: 28320376
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285