Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Institut für Ethik und Geschichte der Medizin, Tubingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Bioethics. 2021 Feb;35(2):125-134. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12836. Epub 2020 Dec 16.
In March 2020, the rapid increase in severe COVID-19 cases overwhelmed the healthcare systems in several European countries. The capacities for artificial ventilation in intensive care units were too scarce to care for patients with acute respiratory disorder connected to the disease. Several professional associations published COVID-19 triage recommendations in an extremely short time: in 21 days between March 6 and March 27. In this article, we compare recommendations from five European countries, which combine medical and ethical reflections on this situation in some detail. Our aim is to provide a detailed overview on the ethical elements of the recommendations, the differences between them and their coherence. In more general terms we want to identify shortcomings in regard to a common European response to the current situation.
2020 年 3 月，严重 COVID-19 病例的迅速增加使几个欧洲国家的医疗体系不堪重负。重症监护病房的人工通气能力严重不足，无法为患有与该疾病相关的急性呼吸障碍的患者提供护理。几个专业协会在极短的时间内发布了 COVID-19 分诊建议：在 3 月 6 日至 3 月 27 日的 21 天内。在本文中，我们比较了五个欧洲国家的建议，这些建议详细结合了对这种情况的医学和伦理思考。我们的目的是提供对建议中的伦理要素、它们之间的差异及其一致性的详细概述。更一般地说，我们希望确定在应对当前形势方面缺乏共同的欧洲反应。
