Cargando…

Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees

BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics committees have been broadly implemented in university hospitals, general hospitals and nursing homes. To ensure the quality of ethics consultations, evaluation should be mandatory. RESEARCH QUESTION/AIM: The aim of this article is to evaluate the perspectives of all peop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scherer, Anika, Alt-Epping, Bernd, Nauck, Friedemann, Marx, Gabriella
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30935285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733019829857
_version_ 1783551829483716608
author Scherer, Anika
Alt-Epping, Bernd
Nauck, Friedemann
Marx, Gabriella
author_facet Scherer, Anika
Alt-Epping, Bernd
Nauck, Friedemann
Marx, Gabriella
author_sort Scherer, Anika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics committees have been broadly implemented in university hospitals, general hospitals and nursing homes. To ensure the quality of ethics consultations, evaluation should be mandatory. RESEARCH QUESTION/AIM: The aim of this article is to evaluate the perspectives of all people involved and the process of implementation on the wards. RESEARCH DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The data were collected in two steps: by means of non-participating observation of four ethics case consultations and by open-guided interviews with 28 participants. Data analysis was performed according to grounded theory. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The study received approval from the local Ethics Commission (registration no.: 32/11/10). FINDINGS: ‘Communication problems’ and ‘hierarchical team conflicts’ proved to be the main aspects that led to ethics consultation, involving two factors: unresolvable differences arise in the context of team conflicts on the ward and unresolvable differences prevent a solution being found. Hierarchical asymmetries, which are common in the medical field, support this vicious circle. Based on this, minor or major disagreements regarding clinical decisions might be seen as ethical conflicts. The expectation on the clinical ethics committee is to solve this (communication) problem, but the participants experienced that hierarchy is maintained by the clinical ethics committee members. DISCUSSION: The asymmetrical structures of the clinical ethics committee reflect the institutional hierarchical nature. They endure, despite the fact that the clinical ethics committee should be able to detect and overcome them. Disagreements among care givers are described as one of the most difficult ethically relevant situations and should be recognised by the clinical ethics committee. On the contrary, discussion of team conflicts and clinical ethical issues should not be combined, since the first is a mandate for team supervision. CONCLUSION: To avoid dominance by physicians and an excessively factual character of the presentation, the case or conflict could be presented by both physicians and nurses, a strategy that strengthens the interpersonal and emotional aspects and also integrates both professional perspectives.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7323753
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73237532020-07-09 Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees Scherer, Anika Alt-Epping, Bernd Nauck, Friedemann Marx, Gabriella Nurs Ethics Original Manuscripts BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics committees have been broadly implemented in university hospitals, general hospitals and nursing homes. To ensure the quality of ethics consultations, evaluation should be mandatory. RESEARCH QUESTION/AIM: The aim of this article is to evaluate the perspectives of all people involved and the process of implementation on the wards. RESEARCH DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The data were collected in two steps: by means of non-participating observation of four ethics case consultations and by open-guided interviews with 28 participants. Data analysis was performed according to grounded theory. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The study received approval from the local Ethics Commission (registration no.: 32/11/10). FINDINGS: ‘Communication problems’ and ‘hierarchical team conflicts’ proved to be the main aspects that led to ethics consultation, involving two factors: unresolvable differences arise in the context of team conflicts on the ward and unresolvable differences prevent a solution being found. Hierarchical asymmetries, which are common in the medical field, support this vicious circle. Based on this, minor or major disagreements regarding clinical decisions might be seen as ethical conflicts. The expectation on the clinical ethics committee is to solve this (communication) problem, but the participants experienced that hierarchy is maintained by the clinical ethics committee members. DISCUSSION: The asymmetrical structures of the clinical ethics committee reflect the institutional hierarchical nature. They endure, despite the fact that the clinical ethics committee should be able to detect and overcome them. Disagreements among care givers are described as one of the most difficult ethically relevant situations and should be recognised by the clinical ethics committee. On the contrary, discussion of team conflicts and clinical ethical issues should not be combined, since the first is a mandate for team supervision. CONCLUSION: To avoid dominance by physicians and an excessively factual character of the presentation, the case or conflict could be presented by both physicians and nurses, a strategy that strengthens the interpersonal and emotional aspects and also integrates both professional perspectives. SAGE Publications 2019-04-01 2019-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7323753/ /pubmed/30935285 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733019829857 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Manuscripts
Scherer, Anika
Alt-Epping, Bernd
Nauck, Friedemann
Marx, Gabriella
Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title_full Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title_fullStr Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title_full_unstemmed Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title_short Team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
title_sort team members perspectives on conflicts in clinical ethics committees
topic Original Manuscripts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30935285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733019829857
work_keys_str_mv AT schereranika teammembersperspectivesonconflictsinclinicalethicscommittees
AT alteppingbernd teammembersperspectivesonconflictsinclinicalethicscommittees
AT nauckfriedemann teammembersperspectivesonconflictsinclinicalethicscommittees
AT marxgabriella teammembersperspectivesonconflictsinclinicalethicscommittees