'The best interest of patients, not self-interest': how clinicians understand altruism.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Altruism refers to acting in 'the best interest of patients, not self-interest'. With an observed discordance between the concept and practice of altruism, and increasing attention to 'pathologic altruism', the role of altruism is blurred in present day medical care. In this background, the required balance of altruistic attitude which needs to be fostered in medical students needs clarity. This problem may be best addressed by the practicing clinicians. The objectives of this study were to explore clinicians' understanding of altruism in the clinical context and to identify the key concepts of altruism which they felt, must be included in clinical practice.Methods
It was an exploratory qualitative study to identify clinicians' understanding of altruism and the key practice points for altruism. Online semi-structured interviews were conducted from 18 clinicians through Zoom and transcribed using Otter. Open coding of interview transcripts was done using Atlas ti 8 and grouped by commonalities under sub themes and themes.Results
The main concepts regarding the clinicians' understanding of altruism were prioritizing patients' interest above oneself, favouring patients beyond routine duty and organized team work for practicing altruism. The essential practice areas identified for altruism were finding a balance between altruistic tendency and self/family life, identifying one's individual capacity for altruism, establishing teamwork for developing a workplace altruistic attitude, and facilitating patients beyond routine duty.Conclusions
Altruism is an important professionalism attribute for clinicians, however prioritizing patients interest requires a balanced approach so that it is effective and sustainable. Workplace altruistic cultures may be better promoted through organized team-based approach rather than individual efforts.
SUBMITTER: Sajjad M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8421461 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Altruism and the medical profession have been linked throughout the history of medicine. Students are drawn to the calling of medicine because of altruistic values, dedication to service, and the desire to alleviate suffering and promote healing. Despite a dedication to these values, altruism in medicine is threatened by empathy erosion that develops in the clinical years of medical school and an increasing rate of medical student burnout. Currently, there are two widespread movements in medicine aimed at addressing the dual loss of altruism and physician and student burnout-professionalism and wellness. Despite widespread recognition of the problems and programs aimed at improving them, there has been little headway, and even calls to abandon altruism in the modern marketplace of medicine. What is needed is not an abandonment of a fundamental, defining value of the profession, but a re-evaluation of the meaning of altruism in medicine and a framework that allows for students and physicians to provide altruistic care for a sustainable, rewarding career in the healing profession. This paper proposes the Enlightened Self-Interest in Altruism (ESIA) model as an ethical framework to allow medical students to synergize the interests of the self with those they serve in a mutually beneficial relationship to improve patient care and the healthcare system at large. The ESIA model acknowledges that egoism and altruism are intertwined, dynamic motivators of behavior. In the enlightened self-interest approach, the interests of the group are also the interests of the self. The physician-patient relationship is a dyad in which egoism and altruism may converge in an enlightened way that acknowledges that the interests of one are the interests of the whole. This is a paradigm shift from the historical view of egoism and altruism as opposing motivations. This paper will present the threats to altruism, explore the interface of egoism and altruism in a clinical vignette, and then present the ESIA framework as an educational approach to aligning the interests of providers and patients to prevent burnout and promote altruism.
| S-EPMC7224037 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to explore self-interest, kin altruism and non-kin altruism reasons that influence people to vaccinate against COVID-19.Study designThis was a cross-sectional study using a fully repeated measures design.MethodsParticipants (N = 178) answered questions on perceived threat and likelihood of infection, vaccination status and opinion on mandatory vaccination. Participants also rated a set of statements that asked how likely these would influence them and others to vaccinate against COVID-19. Statements reflected self-interest, kin altruism or non-kin altruism.ResultsJust more than half of the sample (50.8%) reported the likelihood of infection as somewhat or extremely likely, and almost three-fourths (74.2%) reported that COVID-19 posed a minor or moderate threat to their physical health. Almost three-fourths (74.3%) of the sample were vaccinated, with just more than half (56.2%) in favour of mandatory vaccination. A 2 (self/other) × 3 (self-interest/kin altruism/non-kin altruism) fully repeated measures analysis of variance showed that kin-altruistic reasons were rated most highly, regardless of whether this was regarding oneself or others. Participants rated others as having greater self-interest reasons for vaccination compared with oneself, whereas non-kin altruism reasons for vaccination were rated higher for oneself, compared with others.ConclusionHighlighting the benefits of vaccination for close relatives and vulnerable others in the population would be a useful strategy for government to use when urging the public to vaccinate against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9575617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antiviral agents have been hailed to hold considerable promise for the treatment and prevention of emerging viral diseases like H5N1 avian influenza and SARS. However, antiviral drugs are not completely harmless, and the conditions under which individuals are willing to participate in a large-scale antiviral drug treatment program are as yet unknown. We provide population dynamical and game theoretical analyses of large-scale prophylactic antiviral treatment programs. Throughout we compare the antiviral control strategy that is optimal from the public health perspective with the control strategy that would evolve if individuals make their own, rational decisions. To this end we investigate the conditions under which a large-scale antiviral control program can prevent an epidemic, and we analyze at what point in an unfolding epidemic the risk of infection starts to outweigh the cost of antiviral treatment. This enables investigation of how the optimal control strategy is moulded by the efficacy of antiviral drugs, the risk of mortality by antiviral prophylaxis, and the transmissibility of the pathogen. Our analyses show that there can be a strong incentive for an individual to take less antiviral drugs than is optimal from the public health perspective. In particular, when public health asks for early and aggressive control to prevent or curb an emerging pathogen, for the individual antiviral drug treatment is attractive only when the risk of infection has become non-negligible. It is even possible that from a public health perspective a situation in which everybody takes antiviral drugs is optimal, while the process of individual choice leads to a situation where nobody is willing to take antiviral drugs.
| S-EPMC2592701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The recent threat of bioterrorism has fueled debate on smallpox vaccination policy for the United States. Certain policy proposals call for voluntary mass vaccination; however, if individuals decide whether to vaccinate according to self-interest, the level of herd immunity achieved may differ from what is best for the population as a whole. We present a synthesis of game theory and epidemic modeling that formalizes this conflict between self-interest and group interest and shows that voluntary vaccination is unlikely to reach the group-optimal level. This shortfall results in a substantial increase in expected mortality after an attack.
| S-EPMC193525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Does stepping back to evaluate a situation from a distanced perspective lead us to be selfish or fair? This question has been of philosophical interest for centuries, and, more recently, the focus of extensive empirical inquiry. Yet, extant research reveals a puzzle: some studies suggest that adopting a distanced perspective will produce more rationally self-interested behavior, whereas others suggest that it will produce more impartial behavior. Here we adjudicate between these perspectives by testing the effects of adopting a third-person perspective on decision making in a task that pits rational self-interest against impartiality: the dictator game. Aggregating across three experiments (N = 774), participants who used third-person (i.e., distanced) vs. first-person (i.e., immersed) self-talk during the dictator game kept more money for themselves. We discuss these results in light of prior research showing that psychological distance can promote cooperation and fairmindedness and how the effect of psychological distance on moral decision-making may be sensitive to social context.
| S-EPMC8752811 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDespite significant efforts and cost, quality metrics do not consistently influence practice. While research has focused on improving data through statistical risk-adjustment, whether clinicians understand these data is unknown. Therefore, we assessed clinician comprehension of central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI) quality metric data.DesignCross-sectional survey with an 11-item test of CLABSI data comprehension. Each question assessed 1 of 3 concepts concerning CLABSI understanding: basic numeracy, risk-adjustment numeracy, and risk-adjustment interpretation. Hypothetical data were used and presented in a validated format.ParticipantsClinicians were recruited from 6 nations via Twitter to take an online survey. Clinician eligibility was confirmed by assessing responses to a question regarding CLABSI.Main measuresThe primary outcome was percent correct of attempted questions pertaining to the presented CLABSI data.ResultsNinety-seven clinicians answered at least 1 item, providing 939 responses; 72 answered all 11 items. The mean percentage of correct answers was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-65%). Overall, doctor performance was better than performance by nurses and other respondents (68% [95% CI, 63%-73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 52%-62%], P = 0.003). In basic numeracy, mean percent correct was 82% (95% CI, 77%-87%). For risk-adjustment numeracy, the mean percent correct was 70% (95% CI, 64%-76%). Risk-adjustment interpretation had the lowest average percent correct, 43% (95% CI, 37%-49%). All pairwise differences between concepts were statistically significant at P <0.05.ConclusionsCLABSI quality metric comprehension appears low and varies substantially among clinicians. These findings may contribute to the limited impact of quality metric reporting programs, and further research is needed. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:18-22.
| S-EPMC5831191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nanopore sequencing ground study, extreme environment study and International Space Station (ISS) study
| PRJEB41406 | ENA
Project description:One of the best-known and most replicated laboratory results in behavioral economics is that bargainers frequently reject low offers, even when it harms their material self-interest. This finding could have important implications for international negotiations on many problems facing humanity today, because models of international bargaining assume exactly the opposite: that policy makers are rational and self-interested. However, it is unknown whether elites who engage in diplomatic bargaining will similarly reject low offers because past research has been based almost exclusively on convenience samples of undergraduates, members of the general public, or small-scale societies rather than highly experienced elites who design and bargain over policy. Using a unique sample of 102 policy and business elites who have an average of 21 y of practical experience conducting international diplomacy or policy strategy, we show that, compared with undergraduates and the general public, elites are actually more likely to reject low offers when playing a standard "ultimatum game" that assesses how players bargain over a fixed resource. Elites with more experience tend to make even higher demands, suggesting that this tendency only increases as policy makers advance to leadership positions. This result contradicts assumptions of rational self-interested behavior that are standard in models of international bargaining, and it suggests that the adoption of global agreements on international trade, climate change, and other important problems will not depend solely on the interests of individual countries, but also on whether these accords are seen as equitable to all member states.
| S-EPMC4284540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA rapid increase in restrictive abortion legislation in the United States has sparked renewed interest in self-managed abortion as a response to clinic access barriers. Yet little is known about knowledge of, interest in, and experiences of self-managed medication abortion among patients who obtain abortion care in a clinic.ObjectivesWe examined patients' knowledge of, interest in, and experience with self-managed medication abortion before presenting to the clinic. We characterized the clinic- and person-level factors associated with these measures. Finally, we examined the reasons why patients express an interest in or consider self-management before attending the clinic.Materials and methodsWe surveyed 1502 abortion patients at 3 Texas clinics in McAllen, San Antonio, and Fort Worth. All individuals seeking abortion care who could complete the survey in English or Spanish were invited to participate in an anonymous survey conducted using iPads. The overall response rate was 90%. We examined the prevalence of 4 outcome variables, both overall and separately by site: (1) knowledge of self-managed medication abortion; (2) having considered self-managing using medications before attending the clinic; (3) interest in medication self-management as an alternative to accessing care at the clinic; and (4) having sought or tried any method of self-management before attending the clinic. We used binary logistic regression models to explore the clinic- and patient-level factors associated with these outcome variables. Finally, we analyzed the reasons reported by those who had considered medication self-management before attending the clinic, as well as the reasons reported by those who would be interested in medication self-management as an alternative to in-clinic care.ResultsAmong all respondents, 30% knew about abortion medications available outside the clinic setting (37% in Fort Worth, 33% in McAllen, 19% in San Antonio, P < .001), and among those with prior knowledge, 28% had considered using this option before coming to the clinic (36% in McAllen, 25% in Fort Worth, 21% in San Antonio, P = .028). Among those without prior knowledge of self-management, 39% expressed interest in this option instead of coming to the clinic (54% in San Antonio, 30% in McAllen, 29% in Fort Worth, P < .001). Overall, 13% had sought out or tried any method of self-management before presenting to the clinic (16% in McAllen and 15% in Fort Worth vs 9% in San Antonio, P < .001). Experiencing barriers to clinic access was associated with having considered medication self-management (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-3.0) and with seeking or trying any method of self-management before attending the clinic (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.7). Difficulty affording the cost of in-clinic care was the most commonly cited reason for having considering medication self-management before attending the clinic. Reasons for interest in medication self-management as an alternative to clinic care included both access barriers and preferences for the privacy and comfort of home.ConclusionConsidering or attempting self-managed abortion may be part of the pathway to seeking in-clinic care, particularly among those experiencing access barriers. However, considerable interest in medication self-management as an alternative to the clinic also suggests a demand for more autonomous abortion care options.
| S-EPMC7395859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeart failure is a serious public health concern that afflicts millions of individuals in the United States. Development of behaviors that promote heart failure self-care may be imperative to reduce complications and avoid hospital re-admissions. Mobile health solutions, such as activity trackers and smartphone apps, could potentially help to promote self-care through remote tracking and issuing reminders.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to ascertain heart failure patients' interest in a smartphone app to assist them in managing their treatment and symptoms and to determine factors that influence their interest in such an app.MethodsIn the clinic waiting room on the day of their outpatient clinic appointments, 50 heart failure patients participated in a self-administered survey. The survey comprised 139 questions from previously published, institutional review board-approved questionnaires. The survey measured patients' interest in and experience using technology as well as their function, heart failure symptoms, and heart failure self-care behaviors. The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) was among the 11 questionnaires and was used to measure the heart failure patients' health-related quality of life through patient-reported outcomes.ResultsParticipants were aged 64.5 years on average, 32% (16/50) of the participants were women, and 91% (41/45) of the participants were determined to be New York Heart Association Class II or higher. More than 60% (30/50) of the survey participants expressed interest in several potential features of a smartphone app designed for heart failure patients. Participant age correlated negatively with interest in tracking, tips, and reminders in multivariate regression analysis (P<.05). In contrast, MLHFQ scores (worse health status) produced positive correlations with these interests (P<.05).ConclusionsThe majority of heart failure patients showed interest in activity tracking, heart failure symptom management tips, and reminder features of a smartphone app. Desirable features and an understanding of factors that influence patient interest in a smartphone app for heart failure self-care may allow researchers to address common concerns and to develop apps that demonstrate the potential benefits of mobile technology.
| S-EPMC6851712 | biostudies-literature