A focus group study of ethical issues during climate-informed health decision-making

IF 29.6 1区地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Nature Climate Change Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1038/s41558-024-02121-z

Andrew Hantel, Emily Senay, Cristina Richie, Anna Revette, Brett Nava-Coulter, Fay J. Hlubocky, Thomas P. Walsh, Mark Siegler, Gregory A. Abel

{"title":"A focus group study of ethical issues during climate-informed health decision-making","authors":"Andrew Hantel, Emily Senay, Cristina Richie, Anna Revette, Brett Nava-Coulter, Fay J. Hlubocky, Thomas P. Walsh, Mark Siegler, Gregory A. Abel","doi":"10.1038/s41558-024-02121-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Healthcare delivery contributes to carbon emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated health impacts. There is limited understanding of stakeholder views regarding ethical issues at the intersection of health choices and environmental impact. Here we performed a qualitative study involving seven focus groups with 46 participants who were patients and physicians in the northeastern US health systems. Both patients and physicians were amenable to health decisions that are beneficial for the environment and health. A consumptive healthcare system impeded both groups’ assumption of health-related climate responsibilities. Physicians, however, underestimated patients’ interest in discussing the environmental impacts of health decisions. Patients expressed tension between a personal interest in limiting climate change through health choices and ensuring others were also accountable; they were also concerned that physician paternalism might impede climate-informed health conversations. These findings outline barriers to climate-informed healthcare and begin to establish how they can be addressed. Healthcare emissions negatively affect the environment and health, posing ethical questions between health and environmental impacts. A focus group study in US health systems revealed a willingness to make environmentally informed health decisions and identified barriers to making such decisions.","PeriodicalId":18974,"journal":{"name":"Nature Climate Change","volume":"14 10","pages":"1040-1046"},"PeriodicalIF":29.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02121-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Healthcare delivery contributes to carbon emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated health impacts. There is limited understanding of stakeholder views regarding ethical issues at the intersection of health choices and environmental impact. Here we performed a qualitative study involving seven focus groups with 46 participants who were patients and physicians in the northeastern US health systems. Both patients and physicians were amenable to health decisions that are beneficial for the environment and health. A consumptive healthcare system impeded both groups’ assumption of health-related climate responsibilities. Physicians, however, underestimated patients’ interest in discussing the environmental impacts of health decisions. Patients expressed tension between a personal interest in limiting climate change through health choices and ensuring others were also accountable; they were also concerned that physician paternalism might impede climate-informed health conversations. These findings outline barriers to climate-informed healthcare and begin to establish how they can be addressed. Healthcare emissions negatively affect the environment and health, posing ethical questions between health and environmental impacts. A focus group study in US health systems revealed a willingness to make environmentally informed health decisions and identified barriers to making such decisions.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

关于根据气候做出健康决策过程中的伦理问题的焦点小组研究

医疗保健服务造成了碳排放，加剧了气候变化及其对健康的相关影响。对于利益相关者对健康选择与环境影响交叉点上的伦理问题的看法，我们的了解还很有限。在此，我们开展了一项定性研究，其中包括 7 个焦点小组，46 名参与者分别是美国东北部医疗系统的患者和医生。患者和医生都赞成有利于环境和健康的医疗决策。消耗性医疗系统阻碍了这两个群体承担与健康相关的气候责任。然而，医生低估了患者对讨论健康决策对环境影响的兴趣。患者表示，他们既希望通过健康选择来限制气候变化，又希望确保他人也承担责任；他们还担心医生的家长式作风可能会阻碍他们进行气候知情的健康对话。这些发现概述了气候知情医疗保健的障碍，并开始确定如何解决这些障碍。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Nature Climate Change ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES

CiteScore

40.30

自引率

1.60%

发文量

267

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Nature Climate Change is dedicated to addressing the scientific challenge of understanding Earth's changing climate and its societal implications. As a monthly journal, it publishes significant and cutting-edge research on the nature, causes, and impacts of global climate change, as well as its implications for the economy, policy, and the world at large. The journal publishes original research spanning the natural and social sciences, synthesizing interdisciplinary research to provide a comprehensive understanding of climate change. It upholds the high standards set by all Nature-branded journals, ensuring top-tier original research through a fair and rigorous review process, broad readership access, high standards of copy editing and production, rapid publication, and independence from academic societies and other vested interests. Nature Climate Change serves as a platform for discussion among experts, publishing opinion, analysis, and review articles. It also features Research Highlights to highlight important developments in the field and original reporting from renowned science journalists in the form of feature articles. Topics covered in the journal include adaptation, atmospheric science, ecology, economics, energy, impacts and vulnerability, mitigation, oceanography, policy, sociology, and sustainability, among others.