Cargando…

Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Deciding whether to resuscitate extremely preterm infants (EPIs) is clinically and ethically problematic. The aim of the study was to understand neonatologists’ clinical–ethical decision-making for resuscitation of EPIs. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in Belgium, following a c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cavolo, Alice, de Casterlé, Bernadette Dierckx, Naulaers, Gunnar, Gastmans, Chris
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8467007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34563198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00702-7
_version_ 1784573286521241600
author Cavolo, Alice
de Casterlé, Bernadette Dierckx
Naulaers, Gunnar
Gastmans, Chris
author_facet Cavolo, Alice
de Casterlé, Bernadette Dierckx
Naulaers, Gunnar
Gastmans, Chris
author_sort Cavolo, Alice
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Deciding whether to resuscitate extremely preterm infants (EPIs) is clinically and ethically problematic. The aim of the study was to understand neonatologists’ clinical–ethical decision-making for resuscitation of EPIs. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in Belgium, following a constructivist account of the Grounded Theory. We conducted 20 in-depth, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with neonatologists. Data analysis followed the qualitative analysis guide of Leuven. RESULTS: The main principles guiding participants’ decision-making were EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. Participants agreed that justice as resource allocation should not be considered in resuscitation decision-making. The main ethical challenge for participants was dealing with the conflict between EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This conflict was most prominent when parents and clinicians disagreed about births within the gray zone (24–25 weeks). Participants’ coping strategies included setting limits on extent of EPI care provided and rigidly following established guidelines. However, these strategies were not always feasible or successful. Although rare, these situations often led to long-lasting moral distress. CONCLUSIONS: Participants’ clinical–ethical reasoning for resuscitation of EPIs can be mainly characterized as an attempt to balance EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This approach could explain why neonatologists considered conflicts between these principles as their main ethical challenge and why lack of resolution increases the risk of moral distress. Therefore, more research is needed to better understand moral distress in EPI resuscitation decisions. Clinical Trial Registration: The study received ethical approval from the ethics committee of UZ/KU Leuven (S62867). Confidentiality of personal information and anonymity was guaranteed in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation of 25 May 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8467007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84670072021-09-27 Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study Cavolo, Alice de Casterlé, Bernadette Dierckx Naulaers, Gunnar Gastmans, Chris BMC Med Ethics Research BACKGROUND: Deciding whether to resuscitate extremely preterm infants (EPIs) is clinically and ethically problematic. The aim of the study was to understand neonatologists’ clinical–ethical decision-making for resuscitation of EPIs. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in Belgium, following a constructivist account of the Grounded Theory. We conducted 20 in-depth, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with neonatologists. Data analysis followed the qualitative analysis guide of Leuven. RESULTS: The main principles guiding participants’ decision-making were EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. Participants agreed that justice as resource allocation should not be considered in resuscitation decision-making. The main ethical challenge for participants was dealing with the conflict between EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This conflict was most prominent when parents and clinicians disagreed about births within the gray zone (24–25 weeks). Participants’ coping strategies included setting limits on extent of EPI care provided and rigidly following established guidelines. However, these strategies were not always feasible or successful. Although rare, these situations often led to long-lasting moral distress. CONCLUSIONS: Participants’ clinical–ethical reasoning for resuscitation of EPIs can be mainly characterized as an attempt to balance EPIs’ best interest and respect for parents’ autonomy. This approach could explain why neonatologists considered conflicts between these principles as their main ethical challenge and why lack of resolution increases the risk of moral distress. Therefore, more research is needed to better understand moral distress in EPI resuscitation decisions. Clinical Trial Registration: The study received ethical approval from the ethics committee of UZ/KU Leuven (S62867). Confidentiality of personal information and anonymity was guaranteed in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation of 25 May 2018. BioMed Central 2021-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8467007/ /pubmed/34563198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00702-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Cavolo, Alice
de Casterlé, Bernadette Dierckx
Naulaers, Gunnar
Gastmans, Chris
Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title_full Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title_fullStr Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title_short Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
title_sort neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8467007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34563198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00702-7
work_keys_str_mv AT cavoloalice neonatologistsdecisionmakingforresuscitationandnonresuscitationofextremelypreterminfantsethicalprincipleschallengesandstrategiesaqualitativestudy
AT decasterlebernadettedierckx neonatologistsdecisionmakingforresuscitationandnonresuscitationofextremelypreterminfantsethicalprincipleschallengesandstrategiesaqualitativestudy
AT naulaersgunnar neonatologistsdecisionmakingforresuscitationandnonresuscitationofextremelypreterminfantsethicalprincipleschallengesandstrategiesaqualitativestudy
AT gastmanschris neonatologistsdecisionmakingforresuscitationandnonresuscitationofextremelypreterminfantsethicalprincipleschallengesandstrategiesaqualitativestudy