Suppr超能文献

确定优先排序标准,以补充大流行性流感期间呼吸机分配的重症监护分诊方案。

Identifying prioritization criteria to supplement critical care triage protocols for the allocation of ventilators during a pandemic influenza.

作者信息

Winsor Shawn, Bensimon Cécile M, Sibbald Robert, Anstey Kyle, Chidwick Paula, Coughlin Kevin, Cox Peter, Fowler Robert, Godkin Dianne, Greenberg Rebecca A, Shaul Randi Zlotnik

机构信息

Candidate in Health Policy in the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ontario, and a member of the Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, in Toronto, Ontario.

Researcher for the Canadian Program of Research on Ethics in a Pandemic (CanPREP), in Toronto, Ontario, and a member of the Joint Centre for Bioethics.

出版信息

Healthc Q. 2014;17(2):44-51. doi: 10.12927/hcq.2014.23833.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify supplementary criteria to provide direction when the Ontario Health Plan for an Influenza Pandemic (OHPIP) critical care triage protocol is rendered insufficient by its inability to discriminate among patients assessed as urgent, and there are insufficient critical care resources available to treat those in that category. To accomplish this task, a Supplementary Criteria Task Force for Critical Care Triage was struck at the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics. The task force reviewed publically available protocols and policies on pandemic flu planning, identified 13 potential triage criteria and determined a set of eight key ethical, legal and practical considerations against which it assessed each criterion. An online questionnaire was distributed to clinical, policy and community stakeholders across Canada to obtain feedback on the 13 potential triage criteria toward selecting those that best met the eight considerations. The task force concluded that the balance of arguments favoured only two of the 13 criteria it had identified for consideration: first come, first served and random selection. The two criteria were chosen in part based on a need to balance the clearly utilitarian approach employed in the OHPIP with equity considerations. These criteria serve as a defensible "fail safe" mechanism for any triage protocol.

摘要

本研究的目的是确定补充标准,以便在安大略省流感大流行健康计划(OHPIP)的重症监护分诊协议因无法区分被评估为紧急的患者而显得不足,且没有足够的重症监护资源来治疗该类别患者时提供指导。为完成这项任务,多伦多大学联合生物伦理中心成立了重症监护分诊补充标准特别工作组。该特别工作组审查了公开可用的大流行性流感规划协议和政策,确定了13项潜在分诊标准,并确定了一套八项关键的伦理、法律和实际考量因素,据此对每项标准进行评估。向加拿大各地的临床、政策和社区利益相关者发放了一份在线调查问卷,以获取他们对这13项潜在分诊标准的反馈,从而选出最符合这八项考量因素的标准。特别工作组得出结论,在其确定供审议的13项标准中,只有两项标准在论据平衡上占优势:先来先服务和随机选择。选择这两项标准的部分原因是需要在OHPIP采用的明显功利主义方法与公平考量之间取得平衡。这些标准可作为任何分诊协议的合理“故障安全”机制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验