Donkers Moniek A, Gilissen Vincent J H S, Candel Math J J M, van Dijk Nathalie M, Kling Hans, Heijnen-Panis Ruth, Pragt Elien, van der Horst Iwan, Pronk Sebastiaan A, van Mook Walther N K A
Department of Intensive Care, Maastricht University Medical Center+, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Department of Methodology and Statistics, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Jun 17;22(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00641-3.
The COVID-19 pandemic has created ethical challenges for intensive care unit (ICU) professionals, potentially causing moral distress. This study explored the levels and causes of moral distress and the ethical climate in Dutch ICUs during COVID-19.
An extended version of the Measurement of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP) and Ethical Decision Making Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ) were online distributed among all 84 ICUs. Moral distress scores in nurses and intensivists were compared with the historical control group one year before COVID-19.
Three hundred forty-five nurses (70.7%), 40 intensivists (8.2%), and 103 supporting staff (21.1%) completed the survey. Moral distress levels were higher for nurses than supporting staff. Moral distress levels in intensivists did not differ significantly from those of nurses and supporting staff. "Inadequate emotional support for patients and their families" was the highest-ranked cause of moral distress for all groups of professionals. Of all factors, all professions rated the ethical climate most positively regarding the culture of mutual respect, ethical awareness and support. "Culture of not avoiding end-of-life-decisions" and "Self-reflective and empowering leadership" received the lowest mean scores. Moral distress scores during COVID-19 were significantly lower for ICU nurses (p < 0.001) and intensivists (p < 0.05) compared to one year prior.
Levels and causes of moral distress vary between ICU professionals and differ from the historical control group. Targeted interventions that address moral distress during a crisis are desirable to improve the mental health and retention of ICU professionals and the quality of patient care.
新冠疫情给重症监护病房(ICU)专业人员带来了伦理挑战,可能导致道德困扰。本研究探讨了新冠疫情期间荷兰ICU中道德困扰的程度、原因以及伦理氛围。
在所有84个ICU中在线发放医疗保健专业人员道德困扰测量扩展版(MMD-HP)和伦理决策氛围问卷(EDMCQ)。将护士和重症监护医生的道德困扰得分与新冠疫情前一年的历史对照组进行比较。
345名护士(70.7%)、40名重症监护医生(8.2%)和103名辅助人员(21.1%)完成了调查。护士的道德困扰程度高于辅助人员。重症监护医生的道德困扰程度与护士和辅助人员相比无显著差异。“对患者及其家属的情感支持不足”是所有专业人员群体中道德困扰的首要原因。在所有因素中,所有职业对相互尊重文化、伦理意识和支持方面的伦理氛围评价最为积极。“不回避临终决策的文化”和“自我反思和赋能型领导”的平均得分最低。与一年前相比,新冠疫情期间ICU护士(p < 0.001)和重症监护医生(p < 0.05)的道德困扰得分显著降低。
ICU专业人员的道德困扰程度和原因各不相同,且与历史对照组不同。在危机期间采取针对性干预措施来解决道德困扰,对于改善ICU专业人员的心理健康、留用率以及患者护理质量是可取的。