Psychology, City University of London, London, UK.
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Univeristy of Oxford, Oxford, UK
BMJ Open. 2022 Nov 21;12(11):e062561. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062561.
This study aimed to assess US/UK adults' attitudes towards COVID-19 ventilator and vaccine allocation.
Online survey including US and UK adults, sampled to be representative for sex, age, race, household income and employment. A total of 2580 participated (women=1289, age range=18 to 85 years, Black American=114, BAME=138).
Participants were asked to allocate ventilators or vaccines in scenarios involving individuals or groups with different medical risk and additional risk factors.
Participant race did not impact vaccine or ventilator allocation decisions in the USA, but did impact ventilator allocation attitudes in the UK ((4,602)=6.95, p<0.001). When a racial minority or white patient had identical chances of survival, 14.8% allocated a ventilator to the minority patient (UK BAME participants: 24.4%) and 68.9% chose to toss a coin. When the racial minority patient had a 10% lower chance of survival, 12.4% participants allocated them the ventilator (UK BAME participants: 22.1%). For patients with identical risk of severe COVID-19, 43.6% allocated a vaccine to a minority patient, 7.2% chose a white patient and 49.2% chose a coin toss. When the racial minority patient had a 10% lower risk of severe COVID-19, 23.7% participants allocated the vaccine to the minority patient. Similar results were seen for obesity or male sex as additional risk factors. In both countries, responses on the Modern Racism Scale were strongly associated with attitudes toward race-based ventilator and vaccine allocations (p<0.0001).
Although living in countries with high racial inequality during a pandemic, most US and UK adults in our survey allocated ventilators and vaccines preferentially to those with the highest chance of survival or highest chance of severe illness. Race of recipient led to vaccine prioritisation in cases where risk of illness was similar.
本研究旨在评估美国/英国成年人对 COVID-19 呼吸机和疫苗分配的态度。
包括美国和英国成年人的在线调查,抽样以代表性别、年龄、种族、家庭收入和就业。共有 2580 人参与(女性=1289 人,年龄范围为 18 至 85 岁,美国黑人=114 人,少数族裔=138 人)。
参与者被要求在涉及具有不同医疗风险和其他风险因素的个体或群体的情况下分配呼吸机或疫苗。
参与者的种族在美国没有影响疫苗或呼吸机分配决策,但在英国影响呼吸机分配态度((4,602)=6.95,p<0.001)。当少数族裔或白人患者有相同的生存机会时,14.8%的人将呼吸机分配给少数族裔患者(英国少数族裔参与者:24.4%),68.9%的人选择掷硬币。当少数族裔患者的生存机会低 10%时,12.4%的参与者将呼吸机分配给他们(英国少数族裔参与者:22.1%)。对于 COVID-19 严重程度相同的患者,43.6%的人将疫苗分配给少数族裔患者,7.2%的人选择白人患者,49.2%的人选择掷硬币。当少数族裔患者 COVID-19 严重程度低 10%时,23.7%的参与者将疫苗分配给少数族裔患者。对于肥胖或男性等其他风险因素,也出现了类似的结果。在这两个国家,现代种族主义量表上的反应与基于种族的呼吸机和疫苗分配态度密切相关(p<0.0001)。
尽管在大流行期间生活在种族不平等程度较高的国家,我们调查中的大多数美国和英国成年人在分配呼吸机和疫苗时,优先考虑那些生存机会最高或最有可能患重病的人。在疾病风险相似的情况下,接受者的种族导致疫苗优先接种。