Dataset Information

Ethical and legal views of physicians regarding deactivation of cardiac implantable electrical devices: a quantitative assessment.

ABSTRACT: Despite the high prevalence of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, little is known about physicians' views surrounding the ethical and legal aspects of managing these devices at the end of life.The purpose of this study was to identify physicians' experiences and views surrounding the ethical and legal aspects of managing cardiac devices at the end of life.Survey questions were administered to internal medicine physicians and subspecialists at a tertiary care center. Physicians were surveyed about their clinical experience, legal knowledge, and ethical beliefs relating to the withdrawal of PM and ICD therapy in comparison to other life-sustaining therapies.Responses were obtained from 185 physicians. Compared to withdrawal of PMs and ICDs, physicians more often reported having participated in the withdrawal or removal of mechanical ventilation (86.1% vs 33.9%, P <.0001), dialysis (60.6% vs 33.9%, P <.001), and feeding tubes (73.8% vs 33.9%, P <.0001). Physicians were consistently less comfortable discussing cessation of PMs and ICDs compared to other life-sustaining therapies (P <.005). Only 65% of physicians correctly identified the legal status of euthanasia in the United States, and 20% accurately reported the legal status of physician-assisted suicide in the United States. Compared to deactivation of an ICD, physicians more often characterized deactivation of a PM in a pacemaker-dependent patient as physician-assisted suicide (19% vs 10%, P = .027) or euthanasia (9% vs 1%, P <.001).In this single-center study, internists were less comfortable discussing cessation of PM and ICD therapy compared to other life-sustaining therapies and lacked experience with this practice. Education regarding the legal and ethical parameters of device deactivation is needed.

SUBMITTER: Kramer DB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3001282 | biostudies-other | 2010 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Ethical and legal views of physicians regarding deactivation of cardiac implantable electrical devices: a quantitative assessment.

Kramer Daniel B DB Kesselheim Aaron S AS Brock Dan W DW Maisel William H WH

Heart rhythm 20100719 11

<h4>Background</h4>Despite the high prevalence of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, little is known about physicians' views surrounding the ethical and legal aspects of managing these devices at the end of life.<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this study was to identify physicians' experiences and views surrounding the ethical and legal aspects of managing cardiac devices at the end of life.<h4>Methods</h4>Survey questions were administered to internal medicine physicians a ...[more]

PMID: 20650332

Similar Datasets

Project description:South Africa is a major hub of HIV prevention trials, with plans for a licensure trial to start in 2015. The appropriate standards of care and of prevention in HIV vaccine trials are complex and debated issues and ethical guidelines offer some direction. However, there has been limited empirical exploration of South African stakeholders' perspectives on ethical guidance related to prevention and care in HIV vaccine trials.Site staff, Community Advisory Board members and Research Ethics Committee members involved with current HIV vaccine trials in South Africa were invited to participate in an exploration of their views. A questionnaire listed 10 care and 10 prevention recommendations drawn from two widely available sets of ethical guidelines for biomedical HIV prevention trials. Respondents (n?=?98) rated each recommendation on five dimensions: "Familiarity with", "Ease of Understanding", "Ease of Implementing", "Perceived Protection", and "Agreement with" each ethical recommendation. The ratings were used to describe stakeholder perspectives on dimensions for each recommendation. Dimension ratings were averaged across the five dimensions and used as an indication of overall merit for each recommendation. Differences were explored across dimensions, between care-oriented and prevention-oriented recommendations, and between stakeholder groups.Both care and prevention recommendations were rated highly overall, with median ratings well above the scale midpoint. In general, informed consent recommendations were most positively rated. Care-related recommendations were rated significantly more positively than prevention-related recommendations, with the five lowest-rated recommendations being prevention-related. The most problematic dimension across all recommendations was "Ease of Implementing," and the least problematic was "Agreement with," suggesting the most pressing stakeholder concerns are practical rather than theoretical; that is, respondents agree with but see barriers to the attainment of these recommendations.We propose that prevention recommendations be prioritized for refinement, especially those assigned bottom-ranking scores for "Ease of Implementing", and/ or "Ease of Understanding" in order to assist vaccine stakeholders to better comprehend and implement these recommendations. Further qualitative research could also assist to better understand nuances in stakeholder reservations about implementing such recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundRandomized controlled trial (RCT) trial designs exist on an explanatory-pragmatic spectrum, depending on the degree to which a study aims to address a question of efficacy or effectiveness. As conceptualized by Schwartz and Lellouch in 1967, an explanatory approach to trial design emphasizes hypothesis testing about the mechanisms of action of treatments under ideal conditions (efficacy), whereas a pragmatic approach emphasizes testing effectiveness of two or more available treatments in real-world conditions. Interest in, and the number of, pragmatic trials has grown substantially in recent years, with increased recognition by funders and stakeholders worldwide of the need for credible evidence to inform clinical decision-making. This increase has been accompanied by the onset of learning healthcare systems, as well as an increasing focus on patient-oriented research. However, pragmatic trials have ethical challenges that have not yet been identified or adequately characterized. The present study aims to explore the views of key stakeholders with respect to ethical issues raised by the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. It is embedded within a large, four-year project that seeks to develop guidance for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials. As a first step, this study will address important gaps in the current empirical literature with respect to identifying a comprehensive range of ethical issues arising from the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. By opening up a broad range of topics for consideration within our parallel ethical analysis, we will extend the current debate, which has largely emphasized issues of consent, to the range of ethical considerations that may flow from specific design choices.MethodsSemi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (e.g. trialists, methodologists, lay members of study teams, bioethicists, and research ethics committee members), across multiple jurisdictions, identified based on their known experience and/or expertise with pragmatic trials.DiscussionWe expect that the study outputs will be of interest to a wide range of knowledge users including trialists, ethicists, research ethics committees, journal editors, regulators, healthcare policymakers, research funders and patient groups. All publications will adhere to the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications.

Project description:BackgroundAcute bleeding is an omnipresent challenge for all physicians. Uncontrolled hemorrhage is the most common preventable cause of death after trauma worldwide. In different surgical disciplines, hemorrhage represents an independent risk factor for increased postoperative morbimortality, directly affecting patients' outcomes. This study asked anesthesiologists about their personal perceived challenges when treating bleeding patients.MethodsThis investigator-initiated, prospective, international, dual-center, mixed qualitative and quantitative study interrogated anesthesiologists about what they found easy and what difficult in treating acutely bleeding patients. Following the template approach for qualitative research, we identified major and minor topics through free inductive coding and word count. In a second step, we derived ten statements from the participants' answers. Using a field survey, we then asked the participants to rate their level of agreement with the derived statements. We analyzed the answers using one sample Wilcoxon test and the Mann-Whitney test.ResultsWe included a total of 84 physicians in the qualitative interrogations and a different group of 42 anesthesiologists in the quantitative part. We identified 11 major topics and 19 associated subtopics. The main topics and the degree of agreement (here as agree or strongly agree) were as follows: "Complexity of the topic" (52.4% agreed to find the topic complex), "Cognitive aids" (92.9% agreed to find them helpful), "Time management" (64.3% agreed to feeling time pressure), "Human factors" (95.2% agreed that human factors are essential), "Resources" (95.2% agreed that resources are essential), "Experience" and "Low frequency of cases" (57.1% agreed to lack practice), "Diagnostic methods" (31.0% agreed that the interpretation of test results is difficult), "Anticoagulation" (85.7% agreed to it being difficult), "Treatment" (81.0% agreed to knowing the first therapeutic steps), and "Nothing".ConclusionsAnesthesiologists in two large tertiary care facilities in different parts of the world found coagulation management, especially in anticoagulated patients, complex. We identified the delayed diagnostic test results and their interpretation as challenges. Resources, treatment protocols and human factors such as team communication were perceived to facilitate management. Future studies should explore the challenges in smaller hospitals and other parts of the world and test new technologies addressing the identified difficulties.

Dataset Information

Ethical and legal views of physicians regarding deactivation of cardiac implantable electrical devices: a quantitative assessment.

Publications

Ethical and legal views of physicians regarding deactivation of cardiac implantable electrical devices: a quantitative assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets