Patients with severe mental illness and the ethical challenges related to confidentiality during family involvement: A scoping review.
confidentiality
ethical challenges
ethics
ethics analysis
family involvement
scoping review
severe mental illness
Journal
Frontiers in public health
ISSN: 2296-2565
Titre abrégé: Front Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101616579
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
03
06
2022
accepted:
20
12
2022
entrez:
30
1
2023
pubmed:
31
1
2023
medline:
1
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Despite evidence on the significant potential value of family involvement during the treatment of patients with severe mental illness, research has shown that family involvement is largely underused. The duty of confidentiality is reported to be a key barrier to family involvement. To develop more insight into this barrier, this scoping review focuses on the following question: What are the reported ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness? A systematic search into primary studies was conducted using the following databases: Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Web of Science core collection (Clarivate). The PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) scheme and qualitative content analysis were used to make the ethical challenges more explicit. Twelve studies-both qualitative and quantitative-were included. We identified the following main categories of ethical challenges: (1) the best interest of family members vs. confidentiality, (2) the patient's best interest vs. the right to confidentiality, (3) patient trust and alliance as a reason not to involve the relatives or not to share information, and (4) using confidentiality as a smokescreen. We also identified several subcategories and illustrative and concrete examples of ethical challenges. Through a systematic examination, we discovered various types of ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving the family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness. However, research on these ethical challenges and the constituents of these challenges remains limited and often implicit. An ethical analysis will create knowledge which may facilitate a more balanced and nuanced approach to respecting the principle of confidentiality while also considering other moral principles. The duty of confidentiality does not always have to be a major barrier to family involvement; this insight and using this ethical analysis in the training of healthcare professionals may benefit the patient, the family, and the services.
Sections du résumé
Background
Despite evidence on the significant potential value of family involvement during the treatment of patients with severe mental illness, research has shown that family involvement is largely underused. The duty of confidentiality is reported to be a key barrier to family involvement. To develop more insight into this barrier, this scoping review focuses on the following question: What are the reported ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness?
Methods
A systematic search into primary studies was conducted using the following databases: Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Web of Science core collection (Clarivate). The PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) scheme and qualitative content analysis were used to make the ethical challenges more explicit.
Results
Twelve studies-both qualitative and quantitative-were included. We identified the following main categories of ethical challenges: (1) the best interest of family members vs. confidentiality, (2) the patient's best interest vs. the right to confidentiality, (3) patient trust and alliance as a reason not to involve the relatives or not to share information, and (4) using confidentiality as a smokescreen. We also identified several subcategories and illustrative and concrete examples of ethical challenges.
Conclusions
Through a systematic examination, we discovered various types of ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving the family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness. However, research on these ethical challenges and the constituents of these challenges remains limited and often implicit. An ethical analysis will create knowledge which may facilitate a more balanced and nuanced approach to respecting the principle of confidentiality while also considering other moral principles. The duty of confidentiality does not always have to be a major barrier to family involvement; this insight and using this ethical analysis in the training of healthcare professionals may benefit the patient, the family, and the services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36711422
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.960815
pmc: PMC9877517
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
960815Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Hem, Molewijk, Weimand and Pedersen.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Nov 6;19(1):85
pubmed: 30400913
Nurs Ethics. 2013 May;20(3):285-99
pubmed: 23361144
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jun 5;19(1):54
pubmed: 29871682
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007;44(6):801-11
pubmed: 18075938
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Jan 16;16:4
pubmed: 25591923
BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Aug 29;15:208
pubmed: 26319602
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 May 15;17(1):349
pubmed: 28506296
Health Soc Care Community. 2006 Jul;14(4):357-65
pubmed: 16787487
Schizophr Bull. 2010 Jan;36(1):48-70
pubmed: 19955389
Med J Aust. 2013 Aug 5;199(3 Suppl):S37-9
pubmed: 25369848
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
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Dec 22;19(1):97
pubmed: 30577790
Asian J Psychiatr. 2017 Apr;26:77-81
pubmed: 28483097
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2019 Nov;51(6):680-688
pubmed: 31697045
Psychol Psychother. 2015 Mar;88(1):105-19
pubmed: 24623726
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
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2021 Jun;28(3):394-408
pubmed: 32881201
Qual Health Res. 2014 Oct;24(10):1368-80
pubmed: 25147222
Psychol Med. 2002 Jul;32(5):763-82
pubmed: 12171372
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69
pubmed: 20854677
Bioethics. 2019 Nov;33(9):1012-1021
pubmed: 31339182
J Clin Nurs. 2012 Jan;21(1-2):224-31
pubmed: 21895815
Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105-12
pubmed: 14769454
BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Jul 22;17(1):45
pubmed: 27448597
Schizophr Bull. 2001;27(1):73-92
pubmed: 11215551
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Dec 08;(12):CD000088
pubmed: 21154340
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Mar 05;(3):CD009802
pubmed: 24595545
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2011;32(11):703-10
pubmed: 21992262
Health Soc Care Community. 2008 Jul;16(4):378-87
pubmed: 18194286
Nurs Ethics. 2015 Dec;22(8):870-80
pubmed: 25542405