在 COVID-19 大流行之前和期间,四年级医学生在重症护理实习中遇到的伦理和专业问题。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Rachel A Hadler, Laura A Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian, Erica M Carlisle
{"title":"在 COVID-19 大流行之前和期间,四年级医学生在重症护理实习中遇到的伦理和专业问题。","authors":"Rachel A Hadler, Laura A Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian, Erica M Carlisle","doi":"10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study was to describe ethical and professional issues encountered and the ethical and professional values cited by medical students during their critical care clerkship, with a comparison of issues encountered before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, retrospective mixed-methods study, two investigators at a midwestern US academic medical center performed qualitative content analysis on reflections written by fourth-year medical students about ethical and professional issues encountered during their critical care rotations between March 2016 and September 2021. We also analyzed the ethical/professional values mentioned in their reflections. Descriptive and inferential (χ<sup>2</sup>) statistics were performed to examine differences in issues and values cited before and during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Respondents highlighted several key themes identified in prior studies, including decision making (64.1%), communication between clinicians and families (52.2%), and justice-related issues (32.1%), as well as interdisciplinary communication (25.7%) and issues related to the role of students in the intensive care unit (6.1%). Six novel subthemes were identified in this group, predominantly related to resource availability and end-of-life care. Of 343 reflections, 69% were written before the pandemic. Analysis of ethical and professional issues before and during COVID were notable for several significant differences, including increased discussion of inadequate tools/supplies/equipment (1.3% before vs 17.6% during, <i>P</i> = 0.005) and/or access to care (3.9% before vs 17.6% during, <i>P</i> = 0.03) and increased concerns about the tension between law and ethics (21.2% before vs 41.2% during, <i>P</i> = 0.028). Primacy of patient welfare (49.8% before vs 47.2% during, <i>P</i> = 0.659) and patient autonomy (51.1% before vs 38.9% during, <i>P</i> = 0.036) were the most commonly cited ethical principles in both time frames, often discussed concurrently and in tension.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased reflection by medical students about resources in the intensive care unit, their perception of ethical issues arising in critical illness remained largely focused on enduring challenges in shared decision-making. These findings should be considered when developing ethics curricula for critical care rotations.</p>","PeriodicalId":22043,"journal":{"name":"Southern Medical Journal","volume":"117 3","pages":"117-121"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical and Professional Issues Encountered by Fourth-Year Medical Students during a Critical Care Clerkship before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel A Hadler, Laura A Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian, Erica M Carlisle\",\"doi\":\"10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001660\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study was to describe ethical and professional issues encountered and the ethical and professional values cited by medical students during their critical care clerkship, with a comparison of issues encountered before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, retrospective mixed-methods study, two investigators at a midwestern US academic medical center performed qualitative content analysis on reflections written by fourth-year medical students about ethical and professional issues encountered during their critical care rotations between March 2016 and September 2021. We also analyzed the ethical/professional values mentioned in their reflections. Descriptive and inferential (χ<sup>2</sup>) statistics were performed to examine differences in issues and values cited before and during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Respondents highlighted several key themes identified in prior studies, including decision making (64.1%), communication between clinicians and families (52.2%), and justice-related issues (32.1%), as well as interdisciplinary communication (25.7%) and issues related to the role of students in the intensive care unit (6.1%). Six novel subthemes were identified in this group, predominantly related to resource availability and end-of-life care. Of 343 reflections, 69% were written before the pandemic. Analysis of ethical and professional issues before and during COVID were notable for several significant differences, including increased discussion of inadequate tools/supplies/equipment (1.3% before vs 17.6% during, <i>P</i> = 0.005) and/or access to care (3.9% before vs 17.6% during, <i>P</i> = 0.03) and increased concerns about the tension between law and ethics (21.2% before vs 41.2% during, <i>P</i> = 0.028). Primacy of patient welfare (49.8% before vs 47.2% during, <i>P</i> = 0.659) and patient autonomy (51.1% before vs 38.9% during, <i>P</i> = 0.036) were the most commonly cited ethical principles in both time frames, often discussed concurrently and in tension.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased reflection by medical students about resources in the intensive care unit, their perception of ethical issues arising in critical illness remained largely focused on enduring challenges in shared decision-making. These findings should be considered when developing ethics curricula for critical care rotations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southern Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"117 3\",\"pages\":\"117-121\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southern Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001660\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001660","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究的目的是描述医科学生在重症护理实习期间遇到的伦理和专业问题,以及所引用的伦理和专业价值观,并对 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行之前和期间遇到的问题进行比较:在这项单中心、回顾性混合方法研究中,美国中西部一家学术医学中心的两名研究人员对四年级医学生在 2016 年 3 月至 2021 年 9 月期间撰写的关于重症护理轮转中遇到的伦理和专业问题的反思进行了定性内容分析。我们还分析了他们在反思中提到的伦理/专业价值观。我们进行了描述性和推论性(χ2)统计,以研究大流行之前和期间所提及的问题和价值观的差异:受访者强调了之前研究中发现的几个关键主题,包括决策(64.1%)、临床医生与家属之间的沟通(52.2%)、与司法相关的问题(32.1%)、跨学科沟通(25.7%)以及与重症监护室中学生角色相关的问题(6.1%)。在这一组中发现了六个新的次主题,主要与资源可用性和临终关怀有关。在 343 篇反思中,69% 是在大流行之前撰写的。在 COVID 之前和期间对伦理和专业问题的分析有几个显著的不同点,包括对工具/用品/设备不足的讨论增多(之前为 1.3% ,期间为 17.6%,P = 0.005)和/或获得护理的机会增多(之前为 3.9% ,期间为 17.6%,P = 0.03),以及对法律和伦理之间紧张关系的关注增多(之前为 21.2% ,期间为 41.2%,P = 0.028)。患者福利至上(49.8% 前 vs 47.2%中,P = 0.659)和患者自主权至上(51.1% 前 vs 38.9%中,P = 0.036)是两个时间段内最常被引用的伦理原则,这两项原则经常被同时讨论,而且相互矛盾:尽管 COVID-19 大流行与医科学生对重症监护病房资源的反思增多有关,但他们对危重病中出现的伦理问题的认识仍主要集中在共同决策的持久挑战上。在为重症监护轮转制定伦理课程时,应考虑这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ethical and Professional Issues Encountered by Fourth-Year Medical Students during a Critical Care Clerkship before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to describe ethical and professional issues encountered and the ethical and professional values cited by medical students during their critical care clerkship, with a comparison of issues encountered before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods: In this single-center, retrospective mixed-methods study, two investigators at a midwestern US academic medical center performed qualitative content analysis on reflections written by fourth-year medical students about ethical and professional issues encountered during their critical care rotations between March 2016 and September 2021. We also analyzed the ethical/professional values mentioned in their reflections. Descriptive and inferential (χ2) statistics were performed to examine differences in issues and values cited before and during the pandemic.

Results: Respondents highlighted several key themes identified in prior studies, including decision making (64.1%), communication between clinicians and families (52.2%), and justice-related issues (32.1%), as well as interdisciplinary communication (25.7%) and issues related to the role of students in the intensive care unit (6.1%). Six novel subthemes were identified in this group, predominantly related to resource availability and end-of-life care. Of 343 reflections, 69% were written before the pandemic. Analysis of ethical and professional issues before and during COVID were notable for several significant differences, including increased discussion of inadequate tools/supplies/equipment (1.3% before vs 17.6% during, P = 0.005) and/or access to care (3.9% before vs 17.6% during, P = 0.03) and increased concerns about the tension between law and ethics (21.2% before vs 41.2% during, P = 0.028). Primacy of patient welfare (49.8% before vs 47.2% during, P = 0.659) and patient autonomy (51.1% before vs 38.9% during, P = 0.036) were the most commonly cited ethical principles in both time frames, often discussed concurrently and in tension.

Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased reflection by medical students about resources in the intensive care unit, their perception of ethical issues arising in critical illness remained largely focused on enduring challenges in shared decision-making. These findings should be considered when developing ethics curricula for critical care rotations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Southern Medical Journal
Southern Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
222
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the Birmingham, Alabama-based Southern Medical Association (SMA), the Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) has for more than 100 years provided the latest clinical information in areas that affect patients'' daily lives. Now delivered to individuals exclusively online, the SMJ has a multidisciplinary focus that covers a broad range of topics relevant to physicians and other healthcare specialists in all relevant aspects of the profession, including medicine and medical specialties, surgery and surgery specialties; child and maternal health; mental health; emergency and disaster medicine; public health and environmental medicine; bioethics and medical education; and quality health care, patient safety, and best practices. Each month, articles span the spectrum of medical topics, providing timely, up-to-the-minute information for both primary care physicians and specialists. Contributors include leaders in the healthcare field from across the country and around the world. The SMJ enables physicians to provide the best possible care to patients in this age of rapidly changing modern medicine.
×
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