COVID-19大流行期间医疗保健提供者对影响其重症监护决策因素的看法:一项国际试点调查

Sonali Vadi, Neha Sanwalka, Pramod Thaker
{"title":"COVID-19大流行期间医疗保健提供者对影响其重症监护决策因素的看法:一项国际试点调查","authors":"Sonali Vadi, Neha Sanwalka, Pramod Thaker","doi":"10.5492/wjccm.v14.i1.97006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding a patient's clinical status and setting priorities for their care are two aspects of the constantly changing process of clinical decision-making. One analytical technique that can be helpful in uncertain situations is clinical judgment. Clinicians must deal with contradictory information, lack of time to make decisions, and long-term factors when emergencies occur.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine the ethical issues healthcare professionals faced during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the factors affecting clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This pilot study, which means it was a preliminary investigation to gather information and test the feasibility of a larger investigation was conducted over 6 months and we invited responses from clinicians worldwide who managed patients with COVID-19. The survey focused on topics related to their professional roles and personal relationships. We examined five core areas influencing critical care decision-making: Patients' personal factors, family-related factors, informed consent, communication and media, and hospital administrative policies on clinical decision-making. The collected data were analyzed using the <i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> test for categorical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 102 clinicians from 23 specialties and 17 countries responded to the survey. Age was a significant factor in treatment planning (<i>n</i> = 88) and ventilator access (<i>n</i> = 78). Sex had no bearing on how decisions were made. Most doctors reported maintaining patient confidentiality regarding privacy and informed consent. Approximately 50% of clinicians reported a moderate influence of clinical work, with many citing it as one of the most important factors affecting their health and relationships. Clinicians from developing countries had a significantly higher score for considering a patient's financial status when creating a treatment plan than their counterparts from developed countries. Regarding personal experiences, some respondents noted that treatment plans and preferences changed from wave to wave, and that there was a rapid turnover of studies and evidence. Hospital and government policies also played a role in critical decision-making. Rather than assessing the appropriateness of treatment, some doctors observed that hospital policies regarding medications were driven by patient demand.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Factors other than medical considerations frequently affect management choices. The disparity in treatment choices, became more apparent during the pandemic. We highlight the difficulties and contradictions between moral standards and the realities physicians encountered during this medical emergency. False information, large patient populations, and limited resources caused problems for clinicians. These factors impacted decision-making, which, in turn, affected patient care and healthcare staff well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":66959,"journal":{"name":"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)","volume":"14 1","pages":"97006"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11671838/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare providers' perspectives on factors influencing their critical care decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international pilot survey.\",\"authors\":\"Sonali Vadi, Neha Sanwalka, Pramod Thaker\",\"doi\":\"10.5492/wjccm.v14.i1.97006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding a patient's clinical status and setting priorities for their care are two aspects of the constantly changing process of clinical decision-making. One analytical technique that can be helpful in uncertain situations is clinical judgment. Clinicians must deal with contradictory information, lack of time to make decisions, and long-term factors when emergencies occur.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine the ethical issues healthcare professionals faced during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the factors affecting clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This pilot study, which means it was a preliminary investigation to gather information and test the feasibility of a larger investigation was conducted over 6 months and we invited responses from clinicians worldwide who managed patients with COVID-19. The survey focused on topics related to their professional roles and personal relationships. We examined five core areas influencing critical care decision-making: Patients' personal factors, family-related factors, informed consent, communication and media, and hospital administrative policies on clinical decision-making. The collected data were analyzed using the <i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> test for categorical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 102 clinicians from 23 specialties and 17 countries responded to the survey. Age was a significant factor in treatment planning (<i>n</i> = 88) and ventilator access (<i>n</i> = 78). Sex had no bearing on how decisions were made. Most doctors reported maintaining patient confidentiality regarding privacy and informed consent. Approximately 50% of clinicians reported a moderate influence of clinical work, with many citing it as one of the most important factors affecting their health and relationships. Clinicians from developing countries had a significantly higher score for considering a patient's financial status when creating a treatment plan than their counterparts from developed countries. Regarding personal experiences, some respondents noted that treatment plans and preferences changed from wave to wave, and that there was a rapid turnover of studies and evidence. Hospital and government policies also played a role in critical decision-making. Rather than assessing the appropriateness of treatment, some doctors observed that hospital policies regarding medications were driven by patient demand.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Factors other than medical considerations frequently affect management choices. The disparity in treatment choices, became more apparent during the pandemic. We highlight the difficulties and contradictions between moral standards and the realities physicians encountered during this medical emergency. False information, large patient populations, and limited resources caused problems for clinicians. These factors impacted decision-making, which, in turn, affected patient care and healthcare staff well-being.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":66959,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"97006\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11671838/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v14.i1.97006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v14.i1.97006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:了解患者的临床状况和确定其护理重点是不断变化的临床决策过程的两个方面。在不确定的情况下,临床判断是一种有用的分析技术。当紧急情况发生时,临床医生必须处理相互矛盾的信息、缺乏时间做出决定以及长期因素。目的:探讨2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间医护人员面临的伦理问题及影响临床决策的因素。方法:这项试点研究是一项初步调查,旨在收集信息并测试更大规模调查的可行性,该研究进行了6个月,我们邀请了全球管理COVID-19患者的临床医生的反馈。调查的重点是与他们的职业角色和个人关系相关的话题。我们研究了影响重症护理决策的五个核心领域:患者个人因素、家庭相关因素、知情同意、沟通和媒体以及医院行政政策对临床决策的影响。收集的资料采用分类变量的χ 2检验进行分析。结果:共有来自17个国家23个专业的102名临床医生参与了调查。年龄是影响治疗计划(n = 88)和呼吸机使用(n = 78)的重要因素。性对如何做出决定没有影响。大多数医生报告在隐私和知情同意方面对病人保密。大约50%的临床医生报告了临床工作的中等影响,许多人认为这是影响他们健康和人际关系的最重要因素之一。在制定治疗计划时,发展中国家的临床医生在考虑患者财务状况方面的得分明显高于发达国家的同行。关于个人经历,一些受访者指出,治疗计划和偏好随着一波又一波的变化而变化,研究和证据的周转很快。医院和政府的政策也在关键决策中发挥了作用。一些医生没有评估治疗的适当性,而是观察到医院有关药物的政策是由病人的需求驱动的。结论:医疗因素以外的因素经常影响治疗选择。在大流行期间,治疗选择的差异变得更加明显。我们强调道德标准与医生在这一医疗紧急情况中遇到的现实之间的困难和矛盾。虚假信息、庞大的患者群体和有限的资源给临床医生带来了问题。这些因素影响决策,进而影响患者护理和医护人员的福祉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Healthcare providers' perspectives on factors influencing their critical care decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international pilot survey.

Background: Understanding a patient's clinical status and setting priorities for their care are two aspects of the constantly changing process of clinical decision-making. One analytical technique that can be helpful in uncertain situations is clinical judgment. Clinicians must deal with contradictory information, lack of time to make decisions, and long-term factors when emergencies occur.

Aim: To examine the ethical issues healthcare professionals faced during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the factors affecting clinical decision-making.

Methods: This pilot study, which means it was a preliminary investigation to gather information and test the feasibility of a larger investigation was conducted over 6 months and we invited responses from clinicians worldwide who managed patients with COVID-19. The survey focused on topics related to their professional roles and personal relationships. We examined five core areas influencing critical care decision-making: Patients' personal factors, family-related factors, informed consent, communication and media, and hospital administrative policies on clinical decision-making. The collected data were analyzed using the χ 2 test for categorical variables.

Results: A total of 102 clinicians from 23 specialties and 17 countries responded to the survey. Age was a significant factor in treatment planning (n = 88) and ventilator access (n = 78). Sex had no bearing on how decisions were made. Most doctors reported maintaining patient confidentiality regarding privacy and informed consent. Approximately 50% of clinicians reported a moderate influence of clinical work, with many citing it as one of the most important factors affecting their health and relationships. Clinicians from developing countries had a significantly higher score for considering a patient's financial status when creating a treatment plan than their counterparts from developed countries. Regarding personal experiences, some respondents noted that treatment plans and preferences changed from wave to wave, and that there was a rapid turnover of studies and evidence. Hospital and government policies also played a role in critical decision-making. Rather than assessing the appropriateness of treatment, some doctors observed that hospital policies regarding medications were driven by patient demand.

Conclusion: Factors other than medical considerations frequently affect management choices. The disparity in treatment choices, became more apparent during the pandemic. We highlight the difficulties and contradictions between moral standards and the realities physicians encountered during this medical emergency. False information, large patient populations, and limited resources caused problems for clinicians. These factors impacted decision-making, which, in turn, affected patient care and healthcare staff well-being.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
216
×
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