Moral Orientation, Moral Decision-Making, and Moral Distress Among Critical Care Physicians: A Qualitative Study.
decision making
ethics
job satisfaction
morals
professionalism
psychological distress
Journal
Critical care explorations
ISSN: 2639-8028
Titre abrégé: Crit Care Explor
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101746347
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Mar 2023
Historique:
entrez:
10
3
2023
pubmed:
11
3
2023
medline:
11
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Moral distress is common among critical care physicians and can impact negatively healthcare individuals and institutions. Better understanding inter-individual variability in moral distress is needed to inform future wellness interventions. To explore when and how critical care physicians experience moral distress in the workplace and its consequences, how physicians' professional interactions with colleagues affected their perceived level of moral distress, and in which circumstances professional rewards were experienced and mitigated moral distress. Interview-based qualitative study using inductive thematic analysis. Twenty critical care physicians practicing in Canadian ICUs who expressed interest in participating in a semi-structured interview after completion of a national, cross-sectional survey of moral distress in ICU physicians. Study participants described different ways to perceive and resolve morally challenging clinical situations, which were grouped into four clinical moral orientations: virtuous, resigned, deferring, and empathic. Moral orientations resulted from unique combinations of strength of personal moral beliefs and perceived power over moral clinical decision-making, which led to different rationales for moral decision-making. Study findings illustrate how sociocultural, legal, and clinical contexts influenced individual physicians' moral orientation and how moral orientation altered perceived moral distress and moral satisfaction. The degree of dissonance between individual moral orientations within care team determined, in part, the quantity of "negative judgments" and/or "social support" that physicians obtained from their colleagues. The levels of moral distress, moral satisfaction, social judgment, and social support ultimately affected the type and severity of the negative consequences experienced by ICU physicians. An expanded understanding of moral orientations provides an additional tool to address the problem of moral distress in the critical care setting. Diversity in moral orientations may explain, in part, the variability in moral distress levels among clinicians and likely contributes to interpersonal conflicts in the ICU setting. Additional investigations on different moral orientations in various clinical environments are much needed to inform the design of effective systemic and institutional interventions that address healthcare professionals' moral distress and mitigate its negative consequences.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36895887
doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000879
pmc: PMC9990831
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e0879Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
Nurs Ethics. 2015 Feb;22(1):131-52
pubmed: 25505098
AMA J Ethics. 2017 Jun 1;19(6):585-594
pubmed: 28644788
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr;21(4):314-323
pubmed: 31725530
Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2019 Dec;31(4):527-536
pubmed: 31685119
J Med Ethics. 1997 Aug;23(4):226-32
pubmed: 9279744
Acad Med. 2014 Jul;89(7):978-83
pubmed: 24662200
BMJ. 2021 Jan 8;372:n28
pubmed: 33419774
Curr Opin Psychol. 2020 Jun;33:23-27
pubmed: 31340194
Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2012 Mar;24(1):91-100
pubmed: 22405714
Nurs Ethics. 2008 Mar;15(2):254-62
pubmed: 18272615
Clin Nurs Res. 2020 May;29(4):215-216
pubmed: 32363981
Med Teach. 2020 Aug;42(8):846-854
pubmed: 32356468
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Feb;29(2):395-8
pubmed: 24146350
Psychol Rep. 2010 Oct;107(2):463-79
pubmed: 21117472
J Adv Nurs. 1992 Feb;17(2):129-37
pubmed: 1556321
J Health Psychol. 2017 Jan;22(1):51-67
pubmed: 26220460
Front Psychol. 2019 Feb 28;10:292
pubmed: 30873066
Nurs Ethics. 2013 May;20(3):312-24
pubmed: 23275458
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jul;34(7):521-5
pubmed: 18591286
Intensive Care Med. 2020 Aug;46(8):1653-1654
pubmed: 32468083
Nurs Ethics. 2020 Jun;27(4):1147-1156
pubmed: 32238031
Crit Care Med. 2017 Mar;45(3):430-437
pubmed: 27930369
J Clin Ethics. 2009 Winter;20(4):330-42
pubmed: 20120853
Nurs Ethics. 2011 Mar;18(2):184-91
pubmed: 21372231
Nurs Ethics. 2002 Nov;9(6):636-50
pubmed: 12450000
J Burn Care Res. 2013 Sep-Oct;34(5):521-8
pubmed: 23884046
Psychol Bull. 2000 Sep;126(5):703-26
pubmed: 10989620
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2021 Aug;18(8):1343-1351
pubmed: 33356972
Nurs Ethics. 2003 May;10(3):312-22
pubmed: 12762464
Nurs Ethics. 2018 Aug;25(5):552-570
pubmed: 27660185
Crit Care Med. 2007 Feb;35(2):422-9
pubmed: 17205001
J Med Ethics. 2012 Mar;38(3):168-73
pubmed: 21947804
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2015 Mar;47(2):117-25
pubmed: 25440758
Minerva Anestesiol. 2020 Apr;86(4):455-460
pubmed: 31922376