Ethics Consultation Requests Research Articles

Specific Trends in Pediatric Ethical Decision-Making: An 18-Year Review of Ethics Consultation Cases in a Pediatric Hospital.

This is a qualitative examination of ethics consultation requests, outcomes, and ethics committee recommendations at a tertiary/quaternary pediatric hospital in the U.S. The purpose of this review of consults over an 18-year period is to identify specific trends in the types of ethical dilemmas presented in our pediatric setting, the impact of consultation and committee development on the number and type of consults provided, and any clinical features and/or challenges that emerged and contributed to the nature of ethical situations and dilemmas. Furthermore, in reviewing clinical ethics consultation trends for nearly two decades, we can identify topic areas for further ethics education and training for ethics consultants, ethics committee members, and pediatric healthcare teams and professionals based on our experiences. Our study with nearly two decades of data prior to the COVID-19 pandemic can serve as groundwork for future comparisons of consultation requests and ethics support for pediatric hospitals prior to, during, and following a pandemic.

Formal Ethics Consultation in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort of a Quaternary Pediatric Hospital.

To examine characteristics associated with formal ethics consultation (EC) referral in pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) cases, and document ethical issues presented. Retrospective cohort study using mixed methods. Single-center quaternary pediatric hospital. Patients supported on ECMO (January 2012 to December 2021). We compared clinical variables among ECMO patients according to the presence of EC. We defined optimal cutoffs for EC based on run duration, ICU length of stay (LOS), and sum of procedures or complications. To identify independent explanatory variables for EC, we used a forward stepwise selection multivariable logistic regression model. EC records were thematically characterized into ethical issues. Of 601 ECMO patients and 225 patients with EC in 10 years, 27 ECMO patients received EC (4.5% of ECMO patients, 12% of all ECs). On univariate analysis, use of EC vs. not was associated with multiple ECMO runs, more complications/procedures, longer ICU LOS and ECMO duration, cardiac admissions, decannulation outcome, and higher mortality. Cutoffs for EC were ICU LOS >52 days, run duration >160 hours, and >6 complications/procedures. Independent associations with EC included these three cutoffs and older age. The model showed good discrimination (area under the curve 0.88 [0.83, 0.93]) and fit. The most common primary ethical issues were related to end-of-life, ECMO discontinuation, and treatment decision-making. Moral distress was cited in 22 of 27 cases (82%). EC was used in 4.5% of our pediatric ECMO cases, with most ethical issues related to end-of-life care or ECMO discontinuation. Older age, longer ICU LOS, prolonged runs, and multiple procedures/complications were associated with greater odds for EC requests. These data highlight our single-center experience of ECMO-associated ethical dilemmas. Historical referral patterns may guide a supported decision-making framework. Future work will need to include quality improvement projects for timely EC, with evaluation of impacts on relevant endpoints.

Clinical Ethics Consultations and the Necessity of NOT Meeting Expectations: I Never Promised You a Rose Garden.

Clinical ethics consultants (CECs) work in complex environments ripe with multiple types of expectations. Significantly, some are due to the perspectives of professional colleagues and the patients and families with whom CECs consult and concern how CECs can, do, or should function, thus adding to the moral complexity faced by CECs in those particular circumstances. We outline six such common expectations: Ethics Police, Ethics Equalizer, Ethics Superhero, Ethics Expediter, Ethics Healer or Ameliorator, and, finally, Ethics Expert. Framed by examples of requests for ethics consultation that illustrate each kind, along with brief descriptions, we argue that while these expectations ought to be resisted for clear and practical reasons, they also create opportunities for CECs to articulate, educate, and ultimately be responsible to the professional demands of clinical ethics work. Recognizing, acknowledging, and at times resisting those expectations thus become key activities and responsibilities in the performance of ethics consultation.

Ethics Consultation Requests After Implementation of an Electronic Health Record Order.

As the role of clinical ethics consultation in health care advances, there are calls to standardize the process of consultation. The Ethics Committee at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) hypothesized that the process of requesting an ethics consultation could be improved by instituting an electronic health record (EHR) order for consultation requests. This report summarizes the impact of adopting an EHR order for ethics consultation requests at MSK. This retrospective review of all clinical ethics consultations requested at a tertiary cancer center from May 2017 to February 2020 spans 17 months before and after implementation of an electronic order for consultation requests. Summary statistics are presented using Pearson chi-square analyses with a significance level of 0.05. There was a significant increase in the total number of consultation requests placed after implementation of the EHR order (n = 165, 0.08% of total patients) compared with before (n = 108, 0.05% of total patients; P = .007). The number of consults requested by providers from inpatient (P = .02) and outpatient (P = .04) settings significantly increased. The proportion of consults placed by medical versus nonmedical providers remained unchanged (P = .32). In this large single-institution retrospective study, implementation of an EHR order for ethics consultation requests was associated with a significant increase in the number of consultation requests. Implementation of an electronic order may decrease barriers to ethics consultation in diverse practice settings. Further longitudinal, multicenter studies are needed to assess strategies to improve access to clinical ethics consultation for oncology patients.

Identifying disincentives to ethics consultation requests among physicians, advance practice providers, and nurses: a quality improvement all staff survey at a tertiary academic medical center

BackgroundEthics consult services are well established, but often remain underutilized. Our aim was to identify the barriers and perceptions of the Ethics consult service for physicians, advance practice providers (APPs), and nurses at our urban academic medical center which might contribute to underutilization.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional single-health system, anonymous written online survey, which was developed by the UCSD Health Clinical Ethics Committee and distributed by Survey Monkey. We compare responses between physicians, APPs, and nurses using standard parametric and non-parametric statistical methods. Satisfaction with ethics consult and likelihood of calling Ethics service again were assessed using a 0–100 scale using a 5-likert response structured (0 being “not helpful at all” to 100 being “extremely helpful”) and results presented using box plots and interquartile ranges (IQR).ResultsFrom January to July 2019, approximately 3800 surveys were sent to all physicians, APPs and nurses with a return rate of 5.5—10%. Although the majority of respondents had encountered an ethical dilemma (85–92.1%) only approximately half had ever requested an Ethics consult. The primary reason for physicians never having requested a consult was that they never felt the need for help (41%). For APPs the primary reasons were not knowing an Ethics consult service was available (33.3%) or not knowing how to contact Ethics (27.8%). For nurses, it was not knowing how to contact the Ethics consult service (30.8%) or not feeling the need for help (26.2%). The median satisfaction score (IQR) for Ethics consult services rated on a 0–100 scale, from physicians was 76 (29), for AAPs 89 (49), and nurses 70 (40) (p = 0.62). The median (IQR) of likelihood of consulting Ethics in the future also on a 0–100 scale was 71 (47) for physicians, 69 (45) for APPs, and 61 (45) for nurses (p = 0.79). APP’s and nurses were significantly more likely than physicians to believe that the team did not act on the Ethics consult’s recommendations.ConclusionsBased on the results presented, we were able to identify actionable steps to better engage healthcare providers—and in particular APPs and nurses—and scale up institutional educational efforts to increase awareness of the role of the Ethics consult service at our institution. Actionable steps included implementing a system of ongoing feedback that is critical for the sustainability of the Ethics service role. We hope this project can serve as a blueprint for other hospital-based Ethics consult services to improve the quality of their programs.

Pediatric Interprofessional ICU Ethics Rounds: A Single-Center Study.

We sought to examine whether sociodemographic differences, such as race and socioeconomic status, existed between patients in the PICU, pediatric cardiothoracic ICU (PCTU), and NICU who were identified as having ethical issues during interprofessional ethics rounds and all other patients admitted to these units and to characterize the primary ethical issues identified in this context. We compared sociodemographic factors among patients admitted to a quaternary academic children's hospital between January 2017 and December 2018 who were identified as having ethical issues during PICU, PCTU, and NICU interprofessional ethics rounds (n = 122) with those of all other patients admitted to these units (n = 4971). χ2 tests or Fisher's exact tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and a multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed. With bivariate analyses, we detected significant differences by race, insurance type, and ventilator dependence, but no significant differences between the 2 groups existed on the basis of sex, ethnicity, religion, primary language, age, or a socioeconomic status metric. After we adjusted for confounders using a multivariable logistic regression analysis, only patients who were ventilator dependent were at significantly higher odds (odds ratio = 5.78; confidence interval = 3.69-9.04; P < .001) of being identified as having ethical issues. Goals of care was the most frequent ethical issue (44%). Except for ventilator dependence, patients with ethical issues during PICU, PCTU, and NICU interprofessional ethics rounds are demographically similar to overall patients admitted in these units. Future research should be used to assess whether proactive rounds impact the timing of ethics consultation requests as well as to determine if interprofessional ethics rounds influence volume and acuity in formal ethics consultation practices.

Building an Organizational Ethics Program on a Clinical Ethics Foundation

Organizational ethics programs often are created to address tensions in organizational values that have been identified through repeated clinical ethics consultation requests. Clinical ethicists possess some core competencies that are suitable for the leadership of high-quality organizational ethics programs, but they may need to develop new skills to build these programs, such as familiarity with healthcare delivery science, healthcare financing, and quality improvement methodology. To this end, we suggest that clinical ethicists build organizational ethics programs incrementally and via quality improvement projects undertaken in collaboration with senior clinical leaders. Organizational ethics programs often differ from clinical ethics programs in their membership and processes, and likely will require ethicists to forge new partnerships with a wide array of organizational leaders. With attention to the ways that organizational ethics programs differ from clinical ethics programs, and investment in quality improvement methodology and formal institutional needs assessments, clinical ethics leaders can position an organizational ethics program to advocate effectively for visible and compelling alignment of leadership decision making with the values of the organization.

Development and Retrospective Review of a Pediatric Ethics Consultation Service at a Large Academic Center.

The primary objective was to review pediatric ethics consultations (PECs) at a large academic health center over a nine year period, assessing demographics, ethical issues, and consultant intervention. The secondary objective was to describe the evolution of PECs at our institution. This was a retrospective review of Consultation Summary Sheets compiled for PECs at our Academic Health Center between January 2008 and April 2017. There were 165 PECs reviewed during the study period. Most consult requests came from the inpatient setting, with the Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Units being the highest utilizers. Consultation utilization increased over the study period. The most common patient age was less than oneyear. Physicians were most likely to request consultation. Patient Best Interest, Withholding/Withdrawing of Life Sustaining Therapy, and Provider Moral Distress were ethical issues most commonly identified by the consultants. Making recommendations was the most common consultant intervention. The ethics consultation process evolved over time from informal provider discussions, to a hospital infant care review committee, to a pediatric only consultation service, to a combined adult/pediatric consultation service, with variable levels of salary support for consultants. Ethics consultation requests are growing at our institution. Similarities in identified ethical issues exist between our findings and existing literature, however meaningful comparisons remains elusive secondary to variability in approaches to investigation and reporting. A combined paid/volunteer/trainee ethics consultation service model appears sustainable and real time ethics consultation is feasible using this approach.

Clinical ethics consultation among Italian ethics committee: Amixed method study.

The general purpose for ethics consultations is to deliberate on issues on medical and scientific research and act towards the safeguard of the patient's rights and dignity. With the implementation of European Union (EU) Regulation 536/2014 on clinical trials and cost and time-optimization, the nature of consultations and the bodies they are carried out might be to some extent affected. Accordingly, we sought to gain an updated perspective on the current role and current practices of ethics consultations nationwide in both clinical and research settings. The study was carried forth by a three-step mixed-method approach: i) review of policies/regulations for ethics committee (EC) nationwide; ii) a structured survey on ethics consultation activity completed by each EC during 2016; iii) incorporated into the third part, a qualitative assessment with a selected sample of 8 key-informants for a semi-structured interview, discussing EC history, the ethics consultation function, and the professional experience of consultants. Review of the policies/regulations promoted by ECs showed that 72,6% (n = 69) of all the ECs (N = 95) being actually capable of providing ethics consultation service by policy. 71 ECs (74.7%) responded to the survey on ethics consultation requests; among them, 48 (67.6%) provided ethics consultations of which 23 (23/48) actually received requests for this service in the year 2016. Many ECs did not have a structured database in place to provide precise figures of requests received in the last year nor of their contents. To date, ethics consultation in clinical and research practice is largely underappreciated and not well understood by users. The consultants themselves lack a comprehensive vision of work carried out in their field, and bioethics training programs to keep them updated. Despite clinical ethics consultation services should not necessarily be mandatory, following the recent EU Regulation on clinical trials, institutional ethics consultation bodies should be re-evaluated.

Reflecting on the Reasons Pros and Cons Coercive Measures for Patients in Psychiatric and Somatic Care: The Role of Clinical Ethics Consultation. A Pilot Study.

Background and aim: Coercive measures in patient care have come under criticism leading to implement guidelines dedicated to the reduction of coercion. This development of bringing to light clinical ethics support is hoped to serve as a means of building up awareness and potentially reducing the use of coercion. This study explores the specific features of ethics consultation (EC) while dealing with coercion. Material and method: Basel EC documentation presents insight to all persons involved with a case. The EC database of two Basel university hospitals was developed on the grounds of systematic screening and categorization by two reviewers. One hundred fully documented EC cases databased from 2013 to 2016 were screened for the discussion of coercive measures (somatic hospital and psychiatry: 50% cases). Results: Twenty-four out of 100 EC cases addressed coercion in relation to a clinically relevant question, such as compulsory treatment (70.8%), involuntary committal (50%), or restricting liberty (16.6%). Only 58.3% of EC requests mentioned coercion as an ethical issue prior to the meeting. In no case was patient decisional capacity given, capacity was impaired (43.5%), not given (33.3%), or unclear (21.7%; one not available). Discussion: As clinical staff appears sensitive to perceiving ethical uncertainty or conflict, but less prepared to articulate ethical concern, EC meetings serve to “diagnose” and “solve” the ethical focus of the problem(s) presented in EC. Patient decisional incapacity proved to be an important part of reasoning, when discussing the principle of harm prevention. While professional judgment of capacity remains unsystematic, rationality or even ethicality of decision making will be hampered. The documented EC cases show a variety of decisions about whether or not coercion was actually applied. Ethical reasoning on the competing options seemed to be instrumental for an unprejudiced decision complying with the normative framework and for building a robust consensus. Conclusions: The recommendation is whether EC should be used as a standard practice whenever coercion is an issue—ideally before coercion is applied, or otherwise. Moreover, more efforts should be made toward early and professional assessment of patient capacity and advance care counseling including the offer of advance directives.

The ASBH Approach to Certify Clinical Ethics Consultants Is Both Premature and Inadequate

In November 2018 the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) administered the first Healthcare Ethics Consultant Certification examination to 138 candidates, 136 of whom (98.5 percent) passed and were "certified" as "healthcare ethics consultants." I believe this certification process is both premature and inadequate. Certification for ethics consultants is premature because, as Kornfeld and Prager state repeatedly in their article in this issue of The Journal of Clinical Ethics, "The Clinician as Clinical Ethics Consultant: An Empirical Method of Study," there is a lack of "empirical data on the nature of the problems that prompt ethics consultation requests and on the functions required to address them." These authors proceed to provide a model for the kind of empirical data collection that is needed. Even more relevant, the ASBH model that certifies clinical ethics consultants is inadequate. First, it is inappropriate for a nonclinical organization such as the ASBH to claim the right to certify a clinical process, ethics consultation, involving patients and health professionals. Second, the current certification process requires only a written examination in contrast to the two-step quality attestation process proposed in 2013 by Eric Kodish, MD, and 11 other senior members of the ASBH, including its then president. Third and most importantly, the eligibility criteria for being certified to work on hospital units and to make clinical recommendations for patients and families are minimal and insufficient. The only stated requirements are a bachelor's degree and 400 hours of healthcare ethics consulting experience. By contrast, practicing physicians and nurses train for many years to gain clinical experience that enables them to apply clinical ethical standards in the care and management of all inpatients and outpatients, not just the small percent for whom an ethics consultation is requested.

The Clinician as Clinical Ethics Consultant: An Empirical Method of Study

Some 30 years ago the role of the clinical ethics consultant (CEC) was formalized. At the time, the perception of the role differed between two groups serving in that capacity, clinicians and nonclinicians. Differences in their roles reflected their training and experience. These divergent views were resolved semantically by designating the role of the CEC as "ethics facilitation." In practice the different perspectives have remained. However, the subsequent published literature on clinical ethics consultation has not adequately reflected the activity of the clinician as a CEC. There have been recurring unanswered calls for the acquisition of empirical data on the nature of the problems that prompt ethics consultation requests and the functions required to address them. The authors introduce a template that provides a means to acquire such data for clinician ethicists. A similar instrument could be constructed to reflect the role of the nonclinician ethicist serving in that capacity.

A RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW OF CLINICAL ETHICS CONSULTATIONS REQUESTED BY NURSES FOR ONCOLOGY PATIENTS

&lt;div&gt;Background: With growing importance of clinical ethics in daily nursing practice, and the increasing occurrence and utilization of ethics consultation nationwide, awareness about the motives behind consults is vital to enhancing patient care.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Aim: to determine the predominant requests for ethics consultation from nurses in a cancer setting. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Design: This is a retrospective data review of the ethics consultations recorded in the clinical ethics consultation database. The data reviewed consist of the ethics consults requested by nurses from records in the database of consultations conducted from January 1, 2008 through July 31, 2013. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Findings: The predominant reason for requesting an ethics consult was the level of appropriate care with a total of 27 consults (28%). Within this topic, there were ten consults about the shift from curative care to palliative care, 13 about code status, 2 about general appropriate level of care and 2 regarding hospice.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Discussion: The data show that the nurses at this hospital had similar concerns as other nurses in the literature in that there were several requests for concerns regarding code status, informed consent, and appropriate treatment, including the decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining therapies.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Conclusion: Improving access to ethics consultation services access and the ethics education for nursing staff are necessary steps to improve confidence among them to engage more often with clinical ethics consultation. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

Discovering What Matters: Interrogating Clinician Responses to Ethics Consultation.

Against the background assumptions that (a) knowing what clinical ethics consultation represents to those with whom ethics consultants work most closely is a necessary component for being responsible in the practice of ethics consultation, and (b) the complexities of soliciting and understanding colleague evaluations require another inherent responsibility for the methods by which ethics consultations are evaluated, in this article we report our experience soliciting, analyzing, and trying to understand retrospective evaluations of our Clinical Ethics Consultation Service. These evaluations were collected through a quality assessment effort at our institution. Drawing from the qualitative elements of our survey instrument, we describe unexpected variations among the requests for ethics consultation and the retrospective reports from those colleagues making the requests. Focusing on just one aspect - the reason for request - raised several core questions about how we should evaluate those retrospective reports, what could be learned from the differences that we were now encountering, and what we could learn about the process of evaluating our practices. Working through these questions, we suggest several issues to consider in ongoing efforts to describe and evaluate clinical ethics consultation: the role of time and memory in evaluating retrospective evaluations, the importance of attending to the language of moral shift or disruption with which our colleagues describe their experiences, and how to understand the role of ethics consultation in creating 'moral space' (a la Margaret Urban Walker's conception) for colleagues to process their moral experiences.

Growing an ethics consultation service: A longitudinal study examining two decades of practice

ABSTRACTBackground: Little is known about what factors may contribute to the growth of a consultation service or how a practice may change or evolve across time. Methods: This study examines data collected from a busy ethics consultation service over a period of more than two decades. Results: We report a number of longitudinal findings that represent significant growth in the volume of ethics consultation requests from 19 in 1990 to 551 in 2013, as well as important changes in the patient population for which ethics help is requested. The findings include (1) a steady growth in requests from primary care providers (e.g., physicians and nurses), as well as increases in ancillary services (e.g., social workers); (2) a decrease in length of stay (days) before ethics help is requested; (3) an increase in the reasons that individuals ask for help from ethics; (4) an upsurge in consults requests from areas outside the intensive care unit (ICU); (5) a decrease in patients that died during hospitalization (e.g., live discharges); and (6) growth in the numbers of patients lacking decision-making capacity. Conclusions: We believe the increases in consult requests reflect appropriate and necessary growth because recent consultations have also been associated with consultations requiring (7) additional interventions and (8) reasonably high time intensity scores.

Perceived low-quality communication is not associated with greater frequency of requests for ethics consultation: Null findings from an empirical study

ABSTRACTBackground: Prior research has explored reasons why health care providers may or may not choose to seek an ethics consultation. Although low-quality communication is evident in many ethics consultations, it is unknown whether poor communication in clinical settings is related to health care providers' requests for ethics involvement. Objective: To assess the relationship between self-reported ratings of health care providers' inter- and intraprofessional communication and ethics consultation requests. Method: This cross-sectional survey was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire of physicians and nurses in six intensive care units at one academic medical center in the United States. The questionnaire assessed perceptions about requesting ethics consultations and how health care providers perceive communication. Results: Two hundred sixty-two participants (228 nurses and 34 physicians) responded to the survey (response rate 55%; 59% for nurses and 41% for physicians). Requests for an ethics consult were positively associated with perceived quality of interprofessional communication (r = .13, p < .05), but perceptions of the number of ethical dilemmas that occur on participants' units each month were negatively associated with the perceived quality of intra-professional communication (r = −.17, p < .01). Conclusion: The relationship that was hypothesized between perceived poor communication and increased number of ethics consultations was not borne out by these data. Indeed, we found the opposite; these finding suggests that good inter- and intraprofessional communication may promote the use of outside resources, such as ethics, when they are needed.

Lessons learned from nurses' requests for ethics consultation: Why did they call and what did they value?

An ongoing challenge for clinical ethics consultation is learning how colleagues in other healthcare professions understand, make use of, and evaluate clinical ethics consultation services. In pursuing such knowledge as part of clinical ethics consultation service quality assessment, clinical ethics consultation services can learn important information about the issues and concerns that prompt colleagues to request ethics consultation. Such knowledge allows for greater outreach, education, and responsiveness by clinical ethics consultation services to the concerns of clinician colleagues. This quality assessment project explores consultation requests and follow-up questionnaire responses voluntarily submitted from nurses who requested clinical ethics consultation. We present qualitative data analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison methods to identify key concerns that prompted requests as well as common themes among nurse requestors' evaluations of what was most important in clinical ethics consultations. Participants and context: A total of 41 nurses requesting clinical ethics consultation and 15 who returned the follow-up questionnaire. Ethical considerations: Our Office of Research Compliance and Quality Improvement determined that our project was not considered human subjects research and so did not require institutional review board approval or exemption. However, efforts were made to avoid any sense of coercion and all data were de-identified prior to analysis. Our analysis revealed six main categories of issues that prompted nurses' requests for ethics consultation, as well as unifying themes around nurses' experiences, advocacy, and family support while caring for patients in the intersections of patients, families, and physicians. The insights gained from analyzing nurses' requests for and responses to clinical ethics consultation may serve as a resource for clinical ethics consultation services seeking to identify, respond to, and educate regarding issues of importance to nurse colleagues and may be a resource for nursing administrators and leadership seeking to identify and address common ethical issues nurses face. Ongoing work on clinical ethics consultation service quality improvement and engagement with our nursing colleagues about their concerns prompting-and their evaluations of-clinical ethics consultation are necessary.

Clinical ethics consultation in patients with head and neck cancer

The purpose of this study was to describe the impact of clinical ethics consultations among patients with head and neck cancer in order to better anticipate and manage clinical challenges. A database was queried to identify patients with head and neck cancer for whom ethics consultation was performed at a comprehensive cancer center (n = 14). Information from the database was verified via data abstraction and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. Common requests for ethics consultation involved code status (6 of 14) and withdrawal/withholding life-sustaining treatments (6 of 14). Common contextual features were interpersonal conflicts (6 of 14) and communication barriers (5 of 14). Airway management concerns were frequent (5 of 14). Whereas 21% of patients had do not resuscitate (DNR) orders before ethics consultation, 79% were DNR subsequently. Ethics consultations among patients with head and neck cancer reflect distinctive complexities inherent to their disease, but are entirely consistent with global clinical ethical themes. Consideration of communication barriers, social isolation/stigma, symptom control, and airway management are critical.

Training in Clinical Ethics: Launching the Clinical Ethics Immersion Course at the Center for Ethics at the Washington Hospital Center

In May 2011, the clinical ethics group of the Center for Ethics at Washington Hospital Center launched a 40-hour, three and one-half day Clinical Ethics Immersion Course. Created to address gaps in training in the practice of clinical ethics, the course is for those who now practice clinical ethics and for those who teach bioethics but who do not, or who rarely, have the opportunity to be in a clinical setting. "Immersion" refers to a high-intensity clinical ethics experience in a busy, urban, acute care hospital. During the Immersion Course, participants join clinical ethicists on working rounds in intensive care units and trauma service. Participants engage in a videotaped role-play conversation with an actor. Each simulated session reflects a practical, realistic clinical ethics case consultation scenario. Participants also review patients' charts, and have small group discussions on selected clinical ethics topics. As ethics consultation requests come into the center, Immersion Course participants accompany clinical ethicists on consultations. Specific to this pilot, because participants' evaluations and course faculty impressions were positive, the Center for Ethics will conduct the course twice each year. We look forward to improving the pilot and establishing the Immersion Course as one step towards addressing the gap in training opportunities in clinical ethics.

Does fear of retaliation deter requests for ethics consultation?

Reports suggest that some health care personnel fear retaliation from seeking ethics consultation. We therefore examined the prevalence and determinants of fear of retaliation and determined whether this fear is associated with diminished likelihood of consulting an ethics committee. We surveyed registered nurses (RNs) and social workers (SWs) in four US states to identify ethical problems they encounter. We developed a retaliation index (1-7 point range) with higher scores indicating a higher perceived likelihood of retaliation. Linear regression analysis was performed to identify socio-demographic and job characteristics associated with fear of retaliation. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether fear of retaliation was associated with less likelihood of seeking consultation. Our sample (N = 1215) was primarily female (85%) and Caucasian (83%) with a mean age of 46 years and 17 years of practice. Among the sample, 293 (48.7%) RNs and 309 (51.3%) SWs reported access to an ethics consultation service. Amongst those with access, 2.8% (n = 17) personally experienced retaliation, 9.1% (n = 55) observed colleagues experience retaliation, 30.2% (n = 182) reported no experience with retaliation but considered it a realistic fear, and 50.8% (n = 305) did not perceive retaliation to be a problem. In logistic regression modeling, fear of retaliation was not associated with the likelihood (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.22-1.89) or frequency of requesting ethics consultation (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.27-2.38). Fear of retaliation from seeking ethics consultation is common among nurses and social workers, nonetheless this fear is not associated with reduced requests for ethics consultation.