波兰护理和助产硕士生对与脑死亡有关的伦理和法律困境的看法。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
International Journal of Public Health Pub Date : 2025-08-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/ijph.2025.1608625
Justyna Czekajewska, Dariusz Walkowiak, Anna Jelińska, Jan Domaradzki
{"title":"波兰护理和助产硕士生对与脑死亡有关的伦理和法律困境的看法。","authors":"Justyna Czekajewska, Dariusz Walkowiak, Anna Jelińska, Jan Domaradzki","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2025.1608625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study analyzes the perceptions of master's nursing and midwifery students regarding ethical and legal dilemmas related to the declaration of brain death.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymized, self-administered web-based survey was conducted among 269 master's students in nursing and midwifery at Poznan University of Medical Sciences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most controversial ethical and legal dilemmas concerned the lack of legal consequences for patients' declarations of will, family objections to organ donation, and sustaining vital functions in pregnant brain-dead patients. While 82.5% accepted the medical definition of brain death, only 53.6% prioritized quality of life over life preservation. Students identified medical knowledge (96.3%) as the most influential factor shaping their attitudes, followed by ethical (66.2%) and religious (45.4%) views. Regression analysis showed that religiosity and age were associated with support for sustaining life functions, while liberal views and a nursing background correlated with greater support for overriding family objections and discontinuing futile therapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Education in up-to-date medical knowledge should place greater emphasis on professional ethics, legal frameworks, and real-life bioethical dilemmas to better prepare students for clinical challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":"70 ","pages":"1608625"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12425832/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Polish Nursing and Midwifery Master's Students' Perceptions of Ethical and Legal Dilemmas Related to Brain Death.\",\"authors\":\"Justyna Czekajewska, Dariusz Walkowiak, Anna Jelińska, Jan Domaradzki\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/ijph.2025.1608625\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study analyzes the perceptions of master's nursing and midwifery students regarding ethical and legal dilemmas related to the declaration of brain death.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymized, self-administered web-based survey was conducted among 269 master's students in nursing and midwifery at Poznan University of Medical Sciences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most controversial ethical and legal dilemmas concerned the lack of legal consequences for patients' declarations of will, family objections to organ donation, and sustaining vital functions in pregnant brain-dead patients. While 82.5% accepted the medical definition of brain death, only 53.6% prioritized quality of life over life preservation. Students identified medical knowledge (96.3%) as the most influential factor shaping their attitudes, followed by ethical (66.2%) and religious (45.4%) views. Regression analysis showed that religiosity and age were associated with support for sustaining life functions, while liberal views and a nursing background correlated with greater support for overriding family objections and discontinuing futile therapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Education in up-to-date medical knowledge should place greater emphasis on professional ethics, legal frameworks, and real-life bioethical dilemmas to better prepare students for clinical challenges.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\"70 \",\"pages\":\"1608625\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12425832/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2025.1608625\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2025.1608625","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究分析护理学和助产学硕士生对宣布脑死亡的伦理和法律困境的看法。方法:对波兹南医科大学护理与助产学专业269名硕士生进行匿名、自我管理的网络调查。结果:最具争议的伦理和法律困境涉及患者遗嘱声明缺乏法律后果,家属反对器官捐赠,以及维持怀孕脑死亡患者的生命功能。82.5%的人接受脑死亡的医学定义,只有53.6%的人认为生活质量比生命保存更重要。学生认为医学知识(96.3%)是影响其态度的最重要因素,其次是伦理(66.2%)和宗教(45.4%)观点。回归分析显示,宗教信仰和年龄与维持生命功能的支持有关,而自由主义观点和护理背景与无视家庭反对和停止无效治疗的更大支持相关。结论:最新医学知识的教育应更加重视职业道德、法律框架和现实生活中的生物伦理困境,以更好地为学生应对临床挑战做好准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Polish Nursing and Midwifery Master's Students' Perceptions of Ethical and Legal Dilemmas Related to Brain Death.

Objectives: This study analyzes the perceptions of master's nursing and midwifery students regarding ethical and legal dilemmas related to the declaration of brain death.

Methods: An anonymized, self-administered web-based survey was conducted among 269 master's students in nursing and midwifery at Poznan University of Medical Sciences.

Results: The most controversial ethical and legal dilemmas concerned the lack of legal consequences for patients' declarations of will, family objections to organ donation, and sustaining vital functions in pregnant brain-dead patients. While 82.5% accepted the medical definition of brain death, only 53.6% prioritized quality of life over life preservation. Students identified medical knowledge (96.3%) as the most influential factor shaping their attitudes, followed by ethical (66.2%) and religious (45.4%) views. Regression analysis showed that religiosity and age were associated with support for sustaining life functions, while liberal views and a nursing background correlated with greater support for overriding family objections and discontinuing futile therapy.

Conclusion: Education in up-to-date medical knowledge should place greater emphasis on professional ethics, legal frameworks, and real-life bioethical dilemmas to better prepare students for clinical challenges.

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
International Journal of Public Health
International Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
269
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信