Cargando…

Lay People’s Ethical Attitudes To Placebo Treatment: A Q-Methodology Study

BACKGROUND: Placebo-treatment acceptability is debated among ethicists, mostly due to conflict between respect-to-autonomy and beneficence principles. It is not clear how lay people balance these and other ethical principles. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-seven respondents rank-ordered 42 opinion...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hammami, Muhammad M, Hammami, Safa, Aboushaar, Reem, Aljomah, Ahmed S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6776293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31631979
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S216565
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Placebo-treatment acceptability is debated among ethicists, mostly due to conflict between respect-to-autonomy and beneficence principles. It is not clear how lay people balance these and other ethical principles. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-seven respondents rank-ordered 42 opinion statements covering various ethical aspects of placebo-treatment, according to a 9-category symmetrical distribution. We analyzed statements’ scores using averaging-analysis and by-person factor analysis (Q-methodology). RESULTS: Respondents’ mean (SD) age was 34.6 (10.6) years, 54% were women, 40% healthcare-related, 68% Muslims (31% Christians), and 39% received general education in Saudi Arabia (24% in the Philippines). On averaging-analysis, the most-agreeable statements were “Acceptable if benefit to patient large” and “Acceptable with physician intent to benefit patient”. The most-disagreeable statements were “Acceptable with physician self-benefit intent” and “Acceptable with large harm to other patients”. Muslims gave a higher rank to “Giving no description is acceptable”, “Acceptable with small benefit to patient”, and “Acceptable with physician intent to benefit patient” and a lower rank to “Acceptable to describe as inactive drug”, “Acceptable with physician intent to please patient caring relative”, and “Acceptable with moderate harm to other patients” (p<0.01). Q-methodology detected several ethical attitude models that were mostly multi-principled and consequentialism-dominated. The majority of Christian and Philippines-educated women loaded on a “relatively family and deception-concerned” model, whereas the majority of Muslim and Saudi Arabia-educated women loaded on a “relatively common-good-concerned” model. The majority of Christian and healthcare men loaded on a “relatively deception-concerned” model, whereas the majority of Muslim and non-healthcare men loaded on a “relatively motives-concerned” model. Of nine intent-related statements, ≥2 received extreme rank on averaging-analysis and in 100% of women and men models. CONCLUSION: 1) On averaging-analysis, patient’s beneficence (consequentialism) followed by physician’s intent (virtue ethics) were more important than deception (respect-to-autonomy). 2) Q-methodology identified several ethical attitude models that were mostly multi-principled and associated with respondents’ demographics.