Westermair Anna Lisa, Reiter-Theil Stella, Wäscher Sebastian, Trachsel Manuel
Clinical Ethics Unit, University Hospital Basel (USB), University Psychiatric Clinics (UPK) Basel, University Children's Hospital Basel (UKBB), Geriatric University Medicine Felix Platter (UAFP), Spitalstrasse 22, Basel, CH-4031, Switzerland.
Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine (IBME), University of Zurich (UZH), Zurich, Switzerland.
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Oct 1;25(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01101-4.
Caring for patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) is associated with high levels of moral distress among healthcare professionals. The main moral conflict has been posited to be between applying coercion to prevent serious complications such as premature death and accepting treatment refusals. However, empirical evidence on this topic is scarce.
We identified all 19 documentations of ethics consultations (ECs) in the context of AN from one clinical ethics support service in Switzerland. These documentations were coded with a sequential deductive-inductive approach and the code system was interpreted in a case-based manner. Here, we present findings on patient characteristics and ethical concerns.
The ECs typically concerned an intensely pretreated, extremely underweight AN patient endangering herself by refusing the proposed treatment. In addition to the justifiability of coercion, frequent ethical concerns were whether further coerced treatment aimed at weight gain would be ineffective or even harmful, evidencing uncertainty about beneficence and non-maleficence and a conflict between these principles. Discussed options included harm reduction (e.g. psychotherapy without weight gain requirements) and palliation (e.g. initiating end-of-life care), the appropriateness of which were ethical concerns in themselves. Overall, nine different types of conflicts between or uncertainties regarding ethical principles were identified with a median of eight per case.
Ethical concerns in caring for persons with AN are diverse and complex. To deal with uncertainty about and conflict between respect for autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence, healthcare professionals consider non-curative approaches. However, currently, uncertainty around general justifiability, eligibility criteria, and concrete protocols hinders their adoption.
照顾神经性厌食症(AN)患者会给医护人员带来高度的道德困扰。主要的道德冲突被认为存在于采用强制手段预防诸如过早死亡等严重并发症与接受患者拒绝治疗之间。然而,关于这一主题的实证证据很少。
我们从瑞士的一项临床伦理支持服务中识别出了所有19份在AN背景下的伦理咨询(EC)记录。这些记录采用顺序演绎-归纳法进行编码,并以基于案例的方式对编码系统进行解释。在此,我们呈现关于患者特征和伦理问题的研究结果。
伦理咨询通常涉及一名经过大量前期治疗、体重极低的AN患者,该患者因拒绝提议的治疗而危及自身。除了强制手段的合理性外,常见的伦理问题还包括进一步旨在增加体重的强制治疗是否无效甚至有害,这表明在有益和无害原则方面存在不确定性以及这些原则之间的冲突。讨论的选项包括减少伤害(例如无体重增加要求的心理治疗)和缓和治疗(例如启动临终关怀),其适当性本身就是伦理问题。总体而言,共识别出九种不同类型的伦理原则之间的冲突或不确定性,每个案例中位数为八种。
照顾AN患者的伦理问题多样且复杂。为应对尊重自主权、有益和无害原则之间的不确定性和冲突,医护人员会考虑非治愈性方法。然而,目前,围绕一般合理性、资格标准和具体方案的不确定性阻碍了这些方法的采用。