Dataset Information

Ethics of Codes and Codes of Ethics: When Is It Ethical to Provide Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Our study aims to provide a paradigm when it is ethical to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:Hospitals around the nation are enacting systems to limit CPR in caring for COVID+ patients for a variety of legitimate reasons and based on concepts of medical futility and allocation of scarce resources. No ethical framework, however, has been proposed as a standard to guide care in this crucial matter. METHODS:Our analysis begins with definitions of ethically relevant terms. We then cycle an illustrative clinical vignette through the mathematically permissible possibilities to account for all conceivable scenarios. Scenarios with ethical tension are examined. RESULTS:Patients have the negative right to refuse care including CPR, but they do not have the positive right to demand it. Our detailed ethical analysis and recommendations support CPR if and only if 1) CPR is judged medically beneficial, and in line with the patient's and values and goals, 2) allocations or scarce resources follow a just and transparent triage system, and 3) providers are protected from contracting the disease. CONCLUSIONS:CPR is an intervention like any other, with attendant risks and benefits and with responsibility for the utilization of limited resources. Our ethical analysis advocates for a systematic approach to codes that respects the important ethical considerations in caring for the critically ill and facilitates patient-centered, evidence-based, and fair treatment to all.

SUBMITTER: Kopar PK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7668330 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Ethics of Codes and Codes of Ethics: When Is It Ethical to Provide Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Kopar Piroska K PK Brown Douglas E DE Turnbull Isaiah R IR

Annals of surgery 20201201 6

<h4>Objective</h4>Our study aims to provide a paradigm when it is ethical to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.<h4>Summary background data</h4>Hospitals around the nation are enacting systems to limit CPR in caring for COVID+ patients for a variety of legitimate reasons and based on concepts of medical futility and allocation of scarce resources. No ethical framework, however, has been proposed as a standard to guide care in this crucial matter. ...[more]

PMID: 33074890

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOutbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) for fear of transmission while breaking social distancing rules. The latest guidelines recommend hands-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and facemask use. However, public willingness in this setup remains unknown.MethodsA cross-sectional, unrestricted volunteer Internet survey was conducted to assess individuals' attitudes and behaviors toward performing BCPR, pre-existing CPR training, occupational identity, age group, and gender. The raking method for weights and a regression analysis for the predictors of willingness were performed.ResultsAmong 1,347 eligible respondents, 822 (61%) had negative attitudes toward performing BCPR. Healthcare providers (HCPs) and those with pre-existing CPR training had fewer negative attitudes (p < 0.001); HCPs and those with pre-existing CPR training and unchanged attitude showed more positive behaviors toward BCPR (p < 0.001). Further, 9.7% of the respondents would absolutely refuse to perform BCPR. In contrast, 16.9% would perform BCPR directly despite the outbreak. Approximately 9.9% would perform it if they were instructed, 23.5%, if they wore facemasks, and 40.1%, if they were to perform hands-only CPR. Interestingly, among the 822 respondents with negative attitudes, over 85% still tended to perform BCPR in the abovementioned situations. The weighted analysis showed similar results. The adjusted predictors for lower negative attitudes toward BCPR were younger age, being a man, and being an HCP; those for more positive behaviors were younger age and being an HCP.ConclusionsOutbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on attitudes and behaviors toward BCPR. Younger individuals, men, HCPs, and those with pre-existing CPR training tended to show fewer negative attitudes and behaviors. Meanwhile, most individuals with negative attitudes still expressed positive behaviors under safer measures such as facemask protection, hands-only CPR, and available dispatch instructions.

Project description:BackgroundECMO is a particularly scarce resource during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its allocation involves ethical considerations that may be different to usual times. There is limited pre-pandemic literature on the ethical factors that ECMO physicians consider during ECMO allocation. During the pandemic, there has been relatively little professional guidance specifically relating to ethics and ECMO allocation; although there has been active ethical debate about allocation of other critical care resources. We report the results of a small international exploratory survey of ECMO clinicians' views on different patient factors in ECMO decision-making prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We then outline current ethical decision procedures and recommendations for rationing life-sustaining treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic, and examine the extent to which current guidelines for ECMO allocation (and reported practice) adhere to these ethical guidelines and recommendations.MethodsAn online survey was performed with responses recorded between mid May and mid August 2020. Participants (n = 48) were sourced from the ECMOCard study group-an international group of experts (n = 120) taking part in a prospective international study of ECMO and intensive care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey compared the extent to which certain ethical factors involved in ECMO resource allocation were considered prior to and during the pandemic.ResultsWhen initiating ECMO during the pandemic, compared to usual times, participants reported giving more ethical weight to the benefit of ECMO to other patients not yet admitted as opposed to those already receiving ECMO, (p < 0.001). If a full unit were referred a good candidate for ECMO, participants were more likely during the pandemic to consider discontinuing ECMO from a current patient with low chance of survival (53% during pandemic vs. 33% prior p = 0.002). If the clinical team recommends that ECMO should cease, but family do not agree, the majority of participants indicated that they would continue treatment, both in usual circumstances (67%) and during the pandemic (56%).ConclusionsWe found differences during the COVID-19 pandemic in prioritisation of several ethical factors in the context of ECMO allocation. The ethical principles prioritised by survey participants were largely consistent with ECMO allocation guidelines, current ethical decision procedures and recommendations for allocation of life-sustaining treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundEthical conflict is a problem with negative consequences, which can compromise the quality and ethical standards of the nursing profession and it is a source of stress for health care practitioners', especially for nurses.ObjectivesThe main aim of this study was to analyze Spanish critical care nurses' level of exposure to ethical conflict and its association with sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19-related variables. Research Design, Participants, and Research context: This was a quantitative cross-sectional descriptive study conducted among 117 nurses working in critical care units. Data collection tools were sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19-related questionnaires and previously validated Spanish version of Ethical Conflict in Nursing Questionnaire-Critical Care Version.Ethical considerationsWe obtained permission from the Ethics Committee and participants' informed consent.FindingsData indicates a moderate level of exposure to ethical conflicts. The most frequent ethical conflicts were related to situations about "treatment and clinical procedures." The most intensity of ethical conflicts was related to situations about "treatment and clinical procedures" and "dynamics of the service and working environment." No statistical significance was identified between the socio-demographic variables and level of exposure to ethical conflicts. However, for critical care nurses working in ICU, nurses with perceived worked stress had a higher level of exposure to ethical conflicts. Likewise, critical care nurses whose family/friends were infected with COVID-19 had a higher level of exposure.ConclusionsCritical care nurses experience a moderate level of exposure to ethical conflicts which is consistent with the results of previous studies. A deeper understanding of ethical conflicts in conflictive situations allows recognition of the situations that occur in everyday clinical practice, identification of the ethical conflicts, and facilitation of the nurses working in the challenging clinical situation.

Dataset Information

Ethics of Codes and Codes of Ethics: When Is It Ethical to Provide Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Publications

Ethics of Codes and Codes of Ethics: When Is It Ethical to Provide Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure