-
JMIR Human Factors Dec 2023Humans currently dominate decision-making in both clinical health services and complex health services such as health policy and health regulation. Many assumptions... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Humans currently dominate decision-making in both clinical health services and complex health services such as health policy and health regulation. Many assumptions inherent in health service models today are underpinned by Ramsey's Expected Utility Theory, a prominent theory in the field of economics that is rooted in rationality. Rational, evidence-based metrics currently dominate the culture of decision-making in health policy and regulation. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, rational metrics alone may not suffice in making better policy and regulatory decisions. There are ethical and moral considerations and other complex factors that cannot be reduced to evidence-based rationality alone. Therefore, this scoping review was undertaken to identify and map the attributes that influence human decision-making in complex health services.
OBJECTIVE
The objective is to identify and map the attributes that influence human decision-making in complex health services that have been reported in the peer-reviewed literature.
METHODS
This scoping review was designed to answer the following research question: what attributes have been reported in the literature that influence human decision-making in complex health services? A clear, reproducible methodology is provided. It is reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) standards and a recognized framework. As the topic of interest merited broad review to scope and understand literature from a holistic viewpoint, a scoping review of literature was appropriate here. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed, and a database search undertaken within 4 search systems-ProQuest, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science.
RESULTS
The results span 46 years, from 1976 to 2022. A total of 167 papers were identified. After removing duplicates, 81 papers remained. Of these, 77 papers were excluded based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The remaining 4 papers were found to be relevant. Citation tracking was undertaken, identifying 4 more relevant papers. Thus, a total of 8 papers were included. These papers were reviewed in detail to identify the human attributes mentioned and count the frequency of mentions. A thematic analysis was conducted to identify the themes.
CONCLUSIONS
The results highlight key themes that underline the complex and nuanced nature of human decision-making. The results suggest that rationality is entrenched and may influence the lexicon of our thinking about decision-making. The results also highlight the counter narrative of decision-making underpinned by uniquely human attributes. This may have ramifications for decision-making in complex health services today. The review itself takes a rational approach, and the methods used were suited to this.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)
RR2-10.2196/42353.
Topics: Humans; Pandemics; Benchmarking; COVID-19; Health Policy; Health Services
PubMed: 38117553
DOI: 10.2196/46490 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2017Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Anticonvulsants (antiepileptic drugs) are drugs frequently used for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of anticonvulsants for treating FM symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 8, 2013), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2013), PsycINFO (1966 to August 2013), SCOPUS (1980 to August 2013) and the reference lists of reviewed articles for published studies and www.clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) for unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials of any formulation of anticonvulsants used for the treatment of people with FM of any age.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed the risks of bias of the studies. We resolved discrepancies by discussion.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies: five with pregabalin and one study each with gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam. A total of 2480 people were included into anticonvulsants groups and 1099 people in placebo groups. The median therapy phase of the studies was 13 weeks. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM. The amount and quality of evidence was sufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in FM. Therefore, we focused on our interpretation of the evidence for pregabalin due to our greater certainty about its effects and its greater relevance to clinical practice. All pregabalin studies had a low risk of bias. Reporting a 50% or greater reduction in pain was more frequent with pregabalin use than with a placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33 to 1.90; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12; 95% CI 9 to 21). The number of people who reported being 'much' or 'very much' improved was higher with pregabalin than with placebo (RR 1.38; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.55; NNTB 9; 95% CI 7 to 15). Pregabalin did not substantially reduce fatigue (SMD -0.17; 95% CI -0.25 to -0.09; 2.7% absolute improvement on a 1 to 50 scale) compared with placebo. Pregabalin had a small benefit over placebo in reducing sleep problems by 6.2% fewer points on a scale of 0 to 100 (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.27). The dropout rate due to adverse events was higher with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.07; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 13; 95% CI 9 to 23). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between pregabalin and placebo use (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.49). Dizziness was reported as an adverse event more frequently with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 3.77; 95% CI 3.06 to 4.63; NNTH 4; 95% CI 3 to 5).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The anticonvulsant, pregabalin, demonstrated a small benefit over placebo in reducing pain and sleep problems. Pregabalin use was shown not to substantially reduce fatigue compared with placebo. Study dropout rates due to adverse events were higher with pregabalin use compared with placebo. Dizziness was a particularly frequent adverse event seen with pregabalin use. At the time of writing this review, pregabalin is the only anticonvulsant drug approved for treating FM in the US and in 25 other non-European countries. However, pregabalin has not been approved for treating FM in Europe. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM.
Topics: Acetamides; Amines; Anticonvulsants; Conflict of Interest; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Fibromyalgia; Gabapentin; Humans; Lacosamide; Levetiracetam; Piracetam; Pregabalin; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 28991361
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010782.pub2 -
BMC Public Health Sep 2018While critically important, child sexual violence (CSV) research poses numerous ethical and safety challenges. Recently, the studies dedicated to understanding and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
While critically important, child sexual violence (CSV) research poses numerous ethical and safety challenges. Recently, the studies dedicated to understanding and addressing CSV in India have been on the rise, but no published ethical guidelines to direct such research currently exist. To help inform ethical and safety recommendations for the design, conduct, and reporting of future CSV research in India and similar settings, we systematically reviewed the ethics and safety practices reported in recent Indian CSV literature.
METHODS
A multi-tiered approach was used to understand current ethical practices and gaps: 1) systematic review of Indian CSV studies published over the past decade, 2) examination of existing guidelines on related topics to develop an ethical framework, 3) development of an ethics checklist based on the recommendations from the surveyed guidelines, and 4) application of the checklist to each of the reviewed studies.
RESULT
Our search yielded 51 eligible studies. From each, data from 6 major thematic areas was extracted: informed consent, confidentiality, selection, training, and protection of study team members, validity of CSV measurement methods, measures to minimize participant harm, and participant compensation. Several gaps were noted: only two-thirds reported approval by ethics committees, obtaining informed consent, and assured participants of confidentiality. Only 25% (13/51) reported assessing ongoing CSV risk and providing necessary support services, none noted whether ongoing CSV was reported to authorities (required by Indian law), and none reported safeguards to protect staff from the effects of conducting CSV research. Further, 43% (22/51) limited surveillance of CSV to one form of abuse and/or used a "loaded term," increasing the potential for underreporting.
CONCLUSIONS
Through enhancing understanding of current ethical practices and gaps in CSV research in India, this systematic review informs reporting protocols and future guidelines for CSV research in India and other similar settings.
Topics: Child; Child Abuse, Sexual; Confidentiality; Ethics, Research; Humans; India; Informed Consent
PubMed: 30261867
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-6036-y -
Medicine Jun 2016The aim of the present article was to systematically review the ethics of surgical innovation and introduce the components of the learning health care system to guide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of the present article was to systematically review the ethics of surgical innovation and introduce the components of the learning health care system to guide future research and debate on surgical innovation.Although the call for evidence-based practice in surgery is increasingly high on the agenda, most surgeons feel that the format of the randomized controlled trial is not suitable for surgery. Innovation in surgery has aspects of, but should be distinguished from both research and clinical care and raises its own ethical challenges.To answer the question "What are the main ethical aspects of surgical innovation?", we systematically searched PubMed and Embase. Papers expressing an opinion, point of view, or position were included, that is, normative ethical papers.We included 59 studies discussing ethical aspects of surgical innovation. These studies discussed 4 major themes: oversight, informed consent, learning curve, and vulnerable patient groups. Although all papers addressed the ethical challenges raised by surgical innovation, surgeons hold no uniform view of surgical innovation, and there is no agreement on the distinction between innovation and research. Even though most agree to some sort of oversight, they offer different alternatives ranging from the formation of new surgical innovation committees to establishing national registries. Most agree that informed consent is necessary for innovative procedures and that surgeons should be adequately trained to assure their competence to tackle the learning curve problem. All papers agree that in case of vulnerable patients, alternatives must be found for the informed consent procedure.We suggest that the concept of the learning health care system might provide guidance for thinking about surgical innovation. The underlying rationale of the learning health care system is to improve the quality of health care by embedding research within clinical care. Two aspects of a learning health care system might particularly enrich the necessary future discussion on surgical innovation: integration of research and practice and a moral emphasis on "learning activities." Future research should evaluate whether the learning health care system and its adjacent moral framework provides ethical guidance for evidence-based surgery.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Diffusion of Innovation; Ethics, Medical; General Surgery; Humans; Informed Consent; Physicians; Social Responsibility; Surgical Procedures, Operative
PubMed: 27336866
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003790 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Feb 2023The devastating effects of COVID-19 sparked debates among professionals in the fields of health, law, and bioethics regarding policies on mandatory vaccination for...
BACKGROUND
The devastating effects of COVID-19 sparked debates among professionals in the fields of health, law, and bioethics regarding policies on mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers. Suboptimal vaccine uptake among healthcare workers had been implicated in the increased risk of nosocomial spread of COVID infection and absenteeism among healthcare workers, impacting the quality of patient care. However, mandatory vaccine policies were also seen to encroach on the autonomy of healthcare workers.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
To synthesise the arguments for and against mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) and its long-term impact on the healthcare workforce, through an analysis of texts and opinions of professionals from different fields of study.
METHODS
This is a systematic review of opinions published in peer-reviewed journals. After initial search in Cochrane and JBI systematic review databases to ensure no previous review had been done, five databases were searched (PsychInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline and Scopus). Inclusion criteria were: 1) focused on COVID-19; 2) healthcare workers specific; 3) specific to mandatory vaccination; 4) opinion piece with an identified author; and 5) in English.
EXCLUSION
1) focus on other vaccine preventable diseases, not COVID-19 and 2) discussion on mandatory vaccination not-specific to healthcare workers. The Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal tool for Text and Opinions was used to assess quality. Data were synthesised in the summary table.
RESULTS
The review included 28 opinion and viewpoint articles. Of these, 12 (43 %) adopted a pro-mandatory vaccination stance, 13 (46 %) were neutral or had presented arguments from both sides of the debate and only three (11 %) were against. The overall arguments among those who were pro-, neutral and anti-mandatory COVID-19 vaccination were underpinned by ethical, moral and legal principles of such a mandate on a vulnerable healthcare workforce. This review highlighted the polarised opinions concerning choices, human rights, professional responsibilities and personal risks (i.e. health risks, losing a job) with the introduction of vaccination mandate. However, the articles found in this review discussed mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers in the USA, Europe and Australia only.
CONCLUSION
The review underscores the need to balance the rights of the public to safe and quality care with the rights and moral obligations of healthcare workers during a public health emergency. This can be achieved when policies and mandates are guided by reliable scientific evidence which are flexible in considering legal and ethical dilemmas.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
To mandate or not to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A synthesis of published opinions in health, law, and bioethics.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Health Personnel; Vaccination; Vaccines
PubMed: 36462385
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104389 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Apr 2024The provision of person-centered dignity-conserving care is central to palliative care. It is important to reevaluate current methods of assessing dignity as the concept... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The provision of person-centered dignity-conserving care is central to palliative care. It is important to reevaluate current methods of assessing dignity as the concept of dignity is multifaceted.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study is to understand the tools which are used to assess a patient's dignity and the elements of dignity evaluated in these tools.
METHODS
Two independent and concurrent Systematic Evidence-Based Approach guided systematic scoping reviews (SSR in SEBA) on existing dignity assessment tools and on accounts of assessments of dignity were carried out. The SSR in SEBA on dignity assessment tools involving PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and CINAHL databases saw 22 full-text articles included from the 645 articles reviewed. The SSR in SEBA on accounts of assessments of dignity featured in the PubMed database identified 102 full-text articles which saw 46 articles included.
RESULTS
The domains identified were factors affecting patients' definition of dignity; elements of dignity-conserving care; and components of effective tools.
CONCLUSION
Current accounts to assess dignity and assessment tools fail to capture shifting self-concepts of dignity holistically. A portfolio-like appraisal of dignity is proposed to achieve assessments that are timely, longitudinal, and patient-specific. Portfolio-based assessments by members of the multidisciplinary team will better direct timely evaluations of relevant aspects of changing concepts of dignity, without losing the patient's holistic perception of dignity.
Topics: Humans; Palliative Care; Personhood; Respect; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Terminal Care
PubMed: 38092260
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.12.008 -
Nursing Open Sep 2023To examine Registered Nurses (RNs') and nursing students' perspectives on factors contributing to moral distress and the effects on their health, well-being and... (Review)
Review
AIM
To examine Registered Nurses (RNs') and nursing students' perspectives on factors contributing to moral distress and the effects on their health, well-being and professional and career intentions.
DESIGN
Joanna Briggs Institute mixed-methods systematic review and thematic synthesis. Registered in Prospero (Redacted).
METHODS
Five databases were searched on 5 May 2021 for studies published in English since January 2010. Methodological quality assessment was conducted in parallel with data extraction.
RESULTS
Searches yielded 2343 hits. Seventy-seven articles were included. Most were correlational design and used convenience sampling. Studies were mainly from North America and Asia and situated in intensive and critical care settings. There were common, consistent sources of moral distress across continents, specialities and settings. Factors related to perceived inability or failure to enact moral agency and responsibility in moral events at individual, team and structural levels generated distress. Moral distress had a negative effect on RNs health and psychological well-being.
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
No patient or public contribution to this systematic review.
Topics: Humans; Students, Nursing; North America; Morals; Job Satisfaction; Nurses
PubMed: 37458290
DOI: 10.1002/nop2.1913 -
Brain and Cognition Oct 2016The aims of this systematic review were to determine: (a) which brain areas are consistently more active when making (i) moral response decisions, defined as choosing a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aims of this systematic review were to determine: (a) which brain areas are consistently more active when making (i) moral response decisions, defined as choosing a response to a moral dilemma, or deciding whether to accept a proposed solution, or (ii) moral evaluations, defined as judging the appropriateness of another's actions in a moral dilemma, rating moral statements as right or wrong, or identifying important moral issues; and (b) shared and significantly different activation patterns for these two types of moral judgements. A systematic search of the literature returned 28 experiments. Activation likelihood estimate analysis identified the brain areas commonly more active for moral response decisions and for moral evaluations. Conjunction analysis revealed shared activation for both types of moral judgement in the left middle temporal gyrus, cingulate gyrus, and medial frontal gyrus. Contrast analyses found no significant clusters of increased activation for the moral evaluations-moral response decisions contrast, but found that moral response decisions additionally activated the left and right middle temporal gyrus and the right precuneus. Making one's own moral decisions involves different brain areas compared to judging the moral actions of others, implying that these judgements may involve different processes.
Topics: Cerebral Cortex; Decision Making; Humans; Morals
PubMed: 27566002
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2016.07.007 -
European Journal of Human Genetics :... Dec 2022Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is becoming increasingly widespread. The aim of this research was to systematically review the literature published on... (Review)
Review
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is becoming increasingly widespread. The aim of this research was to systematically review the literature published on healthcare professionals' knowledge and views about DTC-GT, as an update to a 2012 systematic review. The secondary aim was to assess the knowledge and views of healthcare professionals on the ethical and legal issues pertaining to DTC-GT. A systematic search was performed to identify all relevant studies that have been conducted since 2012. Studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria if they were primary research papers conducted on healthcare professionals about their knowledge and views on health-related DTC-GT. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Medline databases were searched from 2012 to May 2021. Title and abstract were screened, and full texts were reviewed by two study authors independently. New papers included were appraised and data were extracted on study characteristics, knowledge and views on DTC-GT, and ethical and legal issues. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Nineteen new papers were included, along with eight papers from the previous review. There was considerable variation in study participants with differing views, awareness levels, and levels of knowledge about DTC-GT. Genetic counsellors and clinical geneticists generally had more concerns, experience, and knowledge regarding DTC-GT. Ten ethical concerns and four legal concerns were identified. Healthcare professionals' knowledge and experience of DTC-GT, including awareness of DTC-GT ethical and legal concerns, have only minimally improved since the previous review. This emphasises the need for further medical learning opportunities to improve the gaps in knowledge amongst healthcare professionals about DTC-GT.
Topics: Humans; Delivery of Health Care; Direct-To-Consumer Screening and Testing; Genetic Testing; Health Personnel; Morals
PubMed: 36220915
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01205-8 -
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022(1) Background: Nursing and care home staff experienced high death rates of older residents and increased occupational and psychosocial pressures during the COVID-19... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Nursing and care home staff experienced high death rates of older residents and increased occupational and psychosocial pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. The literature has previously found this group to be at risk of developing mental health conditions, moral injury (MI), and moral distress (MD). The latter two terms refer to the perceived ethical wrongdoing which contravenes an individual's moral beliefs and elicits adverse emotional responses. (2) Method: A systematic review was conducted to explore the prevalence, predictors, and psychological experience of MI and MD in the aforementioned population during the COVID-19 pandemic. The databases CINAHL, APA PsychINFO, APA PsychArticles, Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus were systematically searched for original research studies of all designs, published in English, with no geographical restrictions, and dating from when COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency on the 30 January 2020 to the 3 January 2022. Out of 531 studies screened for eligibility, 8 studies were selected for review. A thematic analysis was undertaken to examine the major underpinning themes. (3) Results: MI, MD, and related constructs (notably secondary traumatic stress) were evidenced to be present in staff, although most studies did not explore the prevalence or predictors. The elicited major themes were resource deficits, role challenges, communication and leadership, and emotional and psychosocial consequences. (4) Conclusions: Our findings suggest that moral injury and moral distress were likely to be present prior to COVID-19 but have been exacerbated by the pandemic. Whilst studies were generally of high quality, the dearth of quantitative studies assessing prevalence and predictors suggests a research need, enabling the exploration of causal relationships between variables. However, the implied presence of MI and MD warrants intervention developments and workplace support for nursing and care home staff.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Morals; Pandemics; Prevalence; Workplace
PubMed: 35954948
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19159593