Fins Joseph J, Prager Kenneth M
William E. Davis, Jr., MD Professor of Medical Ethics, Professor of Medicine, and Chief of the Division of Medical Ethics at Weill Cornell Medical College; and is Director of Medical Ethics and an Attending Physician at New York Presbyterian Weil Cornell Medicine in New York, New York USA.
Professor of Medicine, Director of Clinical Ethics, and Chair of the Ethics Committee at Columbia University Medical Center in New York, New York USA.
J Clin Ethics. 2020 Fall;31(3):228-232.
The COVID-19 pandemic that struck New York City in the spring of 2020 was a natural experiment for the clinical ethics services of NewYork-Presbyterian (NYP). Two distinct teams at NYP's flagship academic medical centers-at NYP/Columbia University Medical Center (Columbia) and NYP/Weill Cornell Medical Center (Weill Cornell)-were faced with the same pandemic and operated under the same institutional rules. Each campus used time as an heuristic to analyze our collective response. The Columbia team compares consults during the pandemic with the same period during the year prior. The Weill Cornell service describes the phases of the pandemic to depict its temporal evolution and subsequent ethical challenges. Both sites report that the predominant ethical challenges centered around end-of-life decision making, setting goals of care, and medical futility, all complicated by resource allocation questions and the ambiguity of state law under crisis standards of care. The Columbia campus saw a statistically significant increase in ethics consultations provided to Hispanic patients, perhaps reflective of the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 suffered by this demographic. While Weill Cornell and Columbia saw a surge in clinical ethics consultations, the two services assumed a more expansive role than one normally played in institutional life. Serving as intermediaries between frontline clinicians and senior hospital administrators, consultants provided critical intelligence to hospital leadership about the evolution of the pandemic, disseminated information to clinicians, and attended to the moral distress of colleagues who were asked to provide care under truly extraordinary circumstances. The COVID-19 surge in New York City revealed latent capabilities in ethics consultation that may prove useful to the broader clinical ethics community as it responds to the current pandemic and reconceptualizes its potential for future service.
2020年春季袭击纽约市的新冠疫情,对纽约长老会医院(NYP)的临床伦理服务来说是一场自然实验。NYP旗舰学术医疗中心的两个不同团队——纽约长老会医院/哥伦比亚大学医学中心(哥伦比亚)和纽约长老会医院/威尔康奈尔医学中心(威尔康奈尔)——面临着同样的疫情,并在相同的机构规则下运作。每个院区都以时间为启发式方法来分析我们的集体应对措施。哥伦比亚团队将疫情期间的咨询情况与前一年同期进行比较。威尔康奈尔服务团队描述了疫情的各个阶段,以描绘其时间演变及后续的伦理挑战。两个院区都报告称,主要的伦理挑战集中在临终决策、设定治疗目标和医疗无效性等方面,所有这些都因资源分配问题以及危机护理标准下州法律的模糊性而变得复杂。哥伦比亚院区向西班牙裔患者提供的伦理咨询在统计上有显著增加,这可能反映了该人群在新冠疫情中承受的不成比例的负担。虽然威尔康奈尔和哥伦比亚的临床伦理咨询量激增,但这两项服务所发挥的作用比它们在机构生活中通常发挥的作用更为广泛。作为一线临床医生和医院高级管理人员之间的中介,咨询人员向医院领导层提供了有关疫情演变的关键信息,向临床医生传播信息,并关注那些被要求在真正特殊情况下提供护理的同事的道德困扰。纽约市的新冠疫情高峰揭示了伦理咨询中潜在的能力,这可能对更广泛的临床伦理界在应对当前疫情及重新构想其未来服务潜力时有用。