The conflict between oral health and patient autonomy in dentistry: a scoping review.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Szilárd Dávid Kovács, Anggi Septia Irawan, Szilvia Zörgő, József Kovács
{"title":"The conflict between oral health and patient autonomy in dentistry: a scoping review.","authors":"Szilárd Dávid Kovács, Anggi Septia Irawan, Szilvia Zörgő, József Kovács","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01156-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Respect for patient autonomy, the principle that patients are capable to make informed decisions about medical interventions, is fundamental in present-day medicine. However, if a patient's request is medically not indicated, the practitioner faces an ethical dilemma represented by the conflict of the principles of patient autonomy, beneficence, and maleficence. Adjacent to topics such as medical assistance in dying and healthy limb amputation, this ethical dilemma also manifests in the care of the maxillofacial region (the oral cavity and its surroundings), an area crucial to esthetic appearance, but also to everyday functions including mastication, speech, and facial expression, all of which are related to well-being. Our aim was to explore the manifestations and resolutions of the conflict between oral health and patient autonomy in relevant literature in order to contribute to the discourse of ethical challenges concerning patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We screened all journal articles discussing the researched ethical dilemma obtained from three databases. Two researchers developed a hierarchical coding scheme, where the parent and grandparent codes were designated deductively as: Case (situations involving the researched ethical dilemma), Judgement (decisions made in the ethical dilemma), and Principle (ideas, rules, propositions explaining the judgements); child codes were developed inductively. After coding the sources, we utilized thematic analysis to construct code constellations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most themes identified in our sources advocated for the practitioner to choose the alternative that benefits the patient from a medical perspective, although no theme excluded the consideration of patient autonomy. Instances where respect for patient autonomy was encouraged concerned oral preventive care or when the requested intervention was expected to have an insignificant impact on oral health.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ethical conflicts concerning patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence have a marked presence in oral care. These conflicts arise through the issue of body modification, evident in cosmetic dentistry and requests for tooth extraction. Our sources generally support the argumentation for beneficence, despite the rise of cosmetic procedures in dentistry.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11662789/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01156-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Respect for patient autonomy, the principle that patients are capable to make informed decisions about medical interventions, is fundamental in present-day medicine. However, if a patient's request is medically not indicated, the practitioner faces an ethical dilemma represented by the conflict of the principles of patient autonomy, beneficence, and maleficence. Adjacent to topics such as medical assistance in dying and healthy limb amputation, this ethical dilemma also manifests in the care of the maxillofacial region (the oral cavity and its surroundings), an area crucial to esthetic appearance, but also to everyday functions including mastication, speech, and facial expression, all of which are related to well-being. Our aim was to explore the manifestations and resolutions of the conflict between oral health and patient autonomy in relevant literature in order to contribute to the discourse of ethical challenges concerning patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence.

Methods: We screened all journal articles discussing the researched ethical dilemma obtained from three databases. Two researchers developed a hierarchical coding scheme, where the parent and grandparent codes were designated deductively as: Case (situations involving the researched ethical dilemma), Judgement (decisions made in the ethical dilemma), and Principle (ideas, rules, propositions explaining the judgements); child codes were developed inductively. After coding the sources, we utilized thematic analysis to construct code constellations.

Results: Most themes identified in our sources advocated for the practitioner to choose the alternative that benefits the patient from a medical perspective, although no theme excluded the consideration of patient autonomy. Instances where respect for patient autonomy was encouraged concerned oral preventive care or when the requested intervention was expected to have an insignificant impact on oral health.

Conclusions: Ethical conflicts concerning patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence have a marked presence in oral care. These conflicts arise through the issue of body modification, evident in cosmetic dentistry and requests for tooth extraction. Our sources generally support the argumentation for beneficence, despite the rise of cosmetic procedures in dentistry.

口腔健康与牙科患者自主之间的冲突:范围综述。
背景:尊重患者自主权,即患者有能力对医疗干预作出知情决定的原则,是当今医学的基础。然而,如果病人的要求在医学上是不明确的,医生就会面临一种道德困境,这种困境表现为病人自主、仁慈和恶意原则的冲突。与诸如临终医疗援助和健康截肢等主题相邻,这种伦理困境也体现在对颌面区域(口腔及其周围)的护理上,这是一个对美学外观至关重要的区域,也是包括咀嚼、言语和面部表情在内的日常功能,所有这些都与健康有关。我们的目的是探索相关文献中口腔健康与患者自主之间冲突的表现和解决方案,以促进有关患者自主,慈善和非恶意的伦理挑战的论述。方法:我们从三个数据库中筛选所有讨论已研究的伦理困境的期刊文章。两位研究人员开发了一种分层编码方案,其中父母和祖父母代码演绎指定为:案例(涉及所研究的道德困境的情况),判断(在道德困境中做出的决定)和原则(解释判断的想法,规则和命题);子代码是归纳开发的。在对源代码进行编码后,我们利用主题分析来构建代码星座。结果:在我们的资料中确定的大多数主题主张医生从医学角度选择有利于患者的替代方案,尽管没有主题排除考虑患者的自主权。鼓励尊重病人自主权的情况涉及口腔预防保健或预期所要求的干预措施对口腔健康影响不大的情况。结论:在口腔护理中,患者自主、善意和非恶意的伦理冲突明显存在。这些冲突产生于身体修改的问题,在牙科美容和拔牙的要求中很明显。我们的消息来源普遍支持慈善的论点,尽管牙科美容程序的兴起。
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
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信