Developing an Evaluation Tool for Assessing Clinical Ethics Consultation Skills in Simulation Based Education: The ACES Project

The American Society for Bioethics and Humanities has created a quality attestation (QA) process for clinical ethics consultants; the pilot phase of reviewing portfolios has begun. One aspect of the QA process which is particularly challenging is assessing the interpersonal skills of individual clinical ethics consultants. We propose that using case simulation to evaluate clinical ethics consultants is an approach that can meet this need provided clear standards for assessment are identified. To this end, we developed the Assessing Clinical Ethics Skills (ACES) tool, which identifies and specifies specific behaviors that a clinical ethics consultant should demonstrate in an ethics case simulation. The aim is for the clinical ethics consultant or student to use a videotaped case simulation, along with the ACES tool scored by a trained rater, to demonstrate their competence as part of their QA portfolio. The development and piloting of the tool is described.     

Models of Ethics Consultation Used by Canadian Ethics Consultants: A Qualitative Study

This article describes a qualitative study of models of ethics consultation used by ethics consultants in Canada. We found four different models used by Canadian ethics consultants whom we interviewed, and one sub-variant. We describe (1) the lone ethics consultant model, (1a) the hub-and-spokes sub-variant of this model; (2) the ethics committee model; (3) the capacity-building model; and (4) the facilitated model. Previous empirical studies of ethics consultation describe only two or three of these models.     

The Clinical Ethics Credentialing Project: Preliminary Notes from a Pilot Project to Establish Quality Measures for Ethics Consultation

The Clinical Ethics Credentialing Project (CECP) was intiated in 2007 in response to the lack of uniform standards for both the training of clinical ethics consultants, and for evaluating their work as consultants. CECP participants, all practicing clinical ethics consultants, met monthly to apply a standard evaluation instrument, the “QI tool”, to their consultation notes. This paper describes, from a qualitative perspective, how participants grappled with applying standards to their work. Although the process was marked by resistance and disagreement, it was also noteworthy for the sustained engagement by participants over the year of the project, and a high level of acceptance by its conclusion.     

A descriptive study of healthcare ethics consultants in Canada: Results of a national survey

As part of a project to examine health care ethics consultation in Canada, we surveyed individuals who were considered by themselves or others to play a significant role in health care ethics consultation. Since one goal of the project was to examine the education and abilities necessary for consultants, we sought to determine the qualifications and skills currently possessed by persons considered to be ethics consultants. For the purposes of the questionnaire, 'health care ethics consultation' was defined broadly to include consultation on ethical issues in clinical care or in clinical research, ethics consultation to Clinical Ethics Committees, Research Ethics Committees, and policy formulation committees in health care institutions; 'clinical ethics work' was defined more broadly still to include, in addition to the above, ethics education, administration, research and writing on bioethics other than the above, and public speaking. Three hundred and fifty questionnaires were sent to individuals and institutions across Canada that were thought to have some involvement in health care ethics consultation. Two hundred and fifty-three questionnaires were returned for a response rate of 72%. This report presents initial findings of the study and attempts to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of ethics consultation within Canada. The survey examines demographics, educational background, time spent on ethics, institutional affiliations, approaches to the role of consultation, research related issues, and attitudes toward certification. Of the 253 questionnaires returned, 162 were completed by individuals who indicated that they provided some kind of ethics consultation. Of these, 43 indicated that they spent 30% or more of their time in clinical ethics work. These individuals are quite heterogeneous in background, training and activities, and while the great majority of them are based in an academic setting (university or teaching hospital), many act as resources to community hospitals, long-term care facilities and other organizations. Finally, the survey found that respondents' views on the advisability of certification for those offering ethics consultation were split evenly between those in favour of and those against certification. This report serves, then, as a reference point for studying the roles, responsibilities, training and accreditation of ethics consultants in health care.     

Exploring the role of the ethics committee psychiatrist

Healthcare ethics committees (HEC) have emerged as institutional forums for addressing bioethical dilemmas. Psychiatrists have important roles to play on these committees. Their skills in group process assessment, mental status examination, and character assessment have diverse applications. Psychiatrists can facilitate communication within the committee and as HEC-based clinical ethics consultants. HECs must be concerned with how they arrive at ethical decisions, guarding against political influence or individual monopolization. Psychiatrists can assist these efforts as organizational consultants to HECs. The perception of psychiatrists as reflective, tolerant of ambiguity, humanizing, and approachable about ethical aspects of health care suggests they would make excellent committee leaders. Psychiatrists also have important committee roles to play as ethics educators and policy makers. More demographic data is needed to investigate psychiatrist participation on HECs. Studies of how they are perceived by their ethics committee colleagues may reveal new roles and potential pitfalls for HEC psychiatrists.     

Core Competencies for Health Care Ethics Consultants: In Search of Professional Status in a Post-Modern World

The American Society for Bioethics and the Humanities (ASBH) issued its Core Competencies for Health Care Ethics Consultation just as it is becoming ever clearer that secular ethics is intractably plural and without foundations in any reality that is not a social–historical construction (ASBH Core Competencies for Health Care Ethics Consultation, 2nd edn. American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, Glenview, IL, 2011). Core Competencies fails to recognize that the ethics of health care ethics consultants is not ethics in the usual sense of a morally canonical ethics. Its ethics is the ethics established at law and in enforceable health care public policy in a particular jurisdiction. Its normativity is a legal normativity, so that the wrongness of violating this ethics is simply the legal penalties involved and the likelihood of their being imposed. That the ethics of ethics consultation is that ethics legally established accounts for the circumstance that the major role of hospital ethics consultants is as quasi-lawyers giving legal advice, aiding in risk management, and engaging in mediation. It also indicates why this collage of roles has succeeded so well. This article shows how moral philosophy as it was reborn in the 13th century West led to the ethics of modernity and then finally to the ethics of hospital ethics consultation. It provides a brief history of the emergence of an ethics that is after morality. Against this background, the significance of Core Competencies must be critically reconsidered.     

The transfer of patients' ethics information among cooperating institutions: A future function of ethics networks

With increasing use of ethics resources by health care teams, the number of patients transferred from one care setting to another who may have had ethics consultations is rising rapidly. There has been virtually no discussion in the ethics literature and no experience in our community addressing questions concerning the continuity of ethics care and the transfer of ethics information. Our ethics committee faced the following questions during a recent consultation. Should there be continuity of ethics care between institutions? If so, what should be the nature of the communication? How is continuity best accomplished? Do ethics consultants or committees incur additional liability following the transfer of care? Where should the boundaries of confidentiality be drawn? How can existing health care ethics networks facilitate continuity of ethics care? We address these ethical and logistical questions and hope to encourage others to report their views on these issues.     

上海市医院伦理委员会人员结构分析

对上海市33所公立医院的伦理委员会人员结构进行调查分析，结果显示，委员配置符合国家相关要求，独立顾问的设置有利于提高委员会的工作水平，但也发现伦理委员会的秘书需增加工作时间投入、伦理委员会的伦理审核能力仍需提高。     

Preventive Ethics Through Expanding Education

Healthcare institutions have been making increasing efforts to standardize consultation methodology and to accredit both bioethics training programs and the consultants accordingly. The focus has traditionally been on the ethics consultation as the relevant unit of ethics intervention. Outcome measures are studied in relation to consultations, and the hidden assumption is that consultations are the preferred or best way to address day-to-day ethical dilemmas. Reflecting on the data from an internal quality improvement survey and the literature, we argue that having general ethics education as a key function of ethics services may be more important in meeting the contemporaneous needs of acute care settings. An expanded and varied ethics education, with attention to the time constraints of healthcare workers’ schedules, was a key recommendation brought forward by survey respondents. Promoting ethical reflection and creating a culture of ethics may serve to prevent ethical dilemmas or mitigate their effects.     

Practical Guidance for Charting Ethics Consultations

It is generally accepted that appropriate documentation of activities and recommendations of ethics consultants in patients’ medical records is critical. Despite this acceptance, the bioethics literature is largely devoid of guidance on key elements of an ethics chart note, the degree of specificity that it should contain, and its stylistic tenor. We aim to provide guidance for a variety of persons engaged in clinical ethics consultation: new and seasoned ethics committee members who are new to ethics consultation, students and trainees in clinical ethics, and those who have significant experience with ethics consultation so that they can reflect on their practice. Toward the goal of promoting quality charting practices in ethics consultations, we propose recommendations on a broad array of questions concerning clinical ethics consultation chart notes, including whether and when to write a chart note, and practical considerations for the tenor, purpose, and content of a chart note. Our broader aim is to promote discussion about good charting practices in clinical ethics, with the hope of contributing to clear standards of excellence in clinical ethics consultation.     

Is ethical expertise possible?

Services of ethics committees are nowadays commonly used in such various spheres of life as health care, public administration, business, law, engineering, and scientific research. It is taken that as their members have expertise in ethics, these committees can have valuable contributions to make in solving practical moral problems. It has, however, also been maintained that it is simply absurd to claim that one has some special knowledge and skills in moral matters; in connection with moral questions there is no expertise to be had. In this paper, I assess this criticism of the use of ethics committees and ethics consultants. I argue that there is no sufficient reason to reject the possibility of ethical expertise.     

The clinical ethics consultant: verifying the qualifications of a new type of practitioner in a community hospital

Ethics consultation has been occurring in various forms within hospitals for more than 30 years. These consultations constitute a clinical act, and as such, the qualifications of those who provide them must be verified by the hospitals at which the ethics consultants practice. The clinical nature of the practice exposes the participants to malpractice liability. The field of medical ethics has struggled to provide a clear set of knowledge and skills that characterize its practitioners. Hospitals are faced with the immediate task of assessing the qualifications of and ensuring malpractice coverage for individuals providing clinical ethics consultation. We offer one example of how a community hospital has addressed this challenge.     

Philosophy of Healthcare Ethics Practice Statements: Quality Attestation and Beyond

One element of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities’ recently-piloted quality attestation portfolio for clinical ethics consultants is a “philosophy of clinical ethics consultation statement” describing the candidate’s approach to clinical ethics consultation. To date, these statements have been under-explored in the literature, in contrast to philosophy statements in other fields such as academic teaching. In this article, I argue there is merit in expanding the content of these statements beyond clinical ethics consultation alone to describe the author’s approach to other important “domains” of healthcare ethics practice (e.g., organizational policy development/review and ethics teaching). I also claim such statements have at least three additional uses outside quality attestation: (1) as a reflective practice learning tool to increase role clarity among practicing healthcare ethicists and bioethics fellows; (2) assisting practicing healthcare ethicists in clarifying role expectations with those they work with; and (3) helping inform developing professional practice standards.     

Ethics and palliative care: which consultant and when?

Over the past 30 years, and increasingly over the past decade, palliative care services characteristically address the complexity of communication, decision making, and management of end-of-life issues for patients and families of all ages. Clinical ethics services have a parallel 30-plus year history in the United States-so much so that some have offered that clinical ethics has "cut its teeth" on issues attendant to the beginning and end of life. The authors propose considerations necessary in determining the appropriateness of consultation with palliative care, clinical ethics, or both, and when either may be necessary but perhaps not sufficient for patient and family management. A resolution for any encountered tension and identification of common or overlapping domains for both consultants is presented.     

Towards Substantive Standardization: Ethical Rules as Ethical Presumptions

This paper argues that substantive ethical rules serve a critical ethical function, even in those cases where we should deviate from those rules. Assuming that the rules are valid provides decision-makers with the context essential to reaching a well-justified decision. Recognizing this helps to reconcile two attractive but incompatible positions regarding the evaluation of healthcare ethics consultants. The first position is that ethical rules can validly be used to evaluate the quality of consultants’ advice, ensuring conformity to standards promoted by a significant portion of medical ethicists. The second position—the message of ethical particularism—is that we should not evaluate consultants according to strict rules, since good ethical advice may deviate from even the most carefully wrought moral rules. Steering a path between these extremes, I argue that we should evaluate the quality of consultations by examining whether consultants have communicated the relevant ethical rules to participants as ethical presumptions. In communicating presumptions, a consultant provides an indispensable ingredient to ethical decision-making, while leaving open the possibility that the ethical course of action involves violating the very ethical rules that one should presume.     

Implicit and Explicit Clinical Ethics Support in The Netherlands: A Mixed Methods Overview Study

Internationally, the prevalence of clinical ethics support (CES) in health care has increased over the years. Previous research on CES focused primarily on ethics committees and ethics consultation, mostly within the context of hospital care. The purpose of this article is to investigate the prevalence of different kinds of CES in various Dutch health care domains, including hospital care, mental health care, elderly care and care for people with an intellectual disability. A mixed methods design was used including two survey questionnaires, sent to all health care institutions, two focus groups and 17 interviews with managing directors or ethics support staff. The findings demonstrate that the presence of ethics committees is relatively high, especially in hospitals. Moral case deliberation (MCD) is available in about half of all Dutch health care institutions, and in two-thirds of the mental health care institutions. Ethics consultants are not very prominent. A distinction is made between explicit CES forms, in which the ethical dimension of care is structurally and professionally addressed and implicit CES forms, in which ethical issues are handled indirectly and in an organic way. Explicit CES forms often go together with implicit forms of CES. MCD might function as a bridge between the two. We conclude that explicit and implicit CES are both relevant for clinical ethics in health care. We recommend research regarding how to combine them in an appropriate way.     

Medicine: conflicts of interest in research

A conflict of interest is a set of conditions in which professional judgment concerning a primary interest (patient's welfare, research integrity, ethics, education) tends to be influenced by a secondary interest. Among secondary interests are intellectual conflicts of interest that include the desire for faculty advancement, competition for sponsored research funding, to win prestigious research prizes, as well as financial conflicts of interest that arise when medical investigators own equity in a company that sponsors the study they conduct or when they serve as consultants to companies or are members of the company's advisory boards. Ethical conflicts of interest predominate in undeveloped countries. Known consequences of conflicts of interests include compromising health, death, minimization of adverse reactions, lower research quality, the probability to favor the sponsor's product, and delayed publication when results obtained are not the expected. Medical consciousness should be corrected to avoid moral duality that could harm both patients and medical ethics.     

The Core Competencies: A Roman Catholic Critique

This article critically examines, from the perspective of a Roman Catholic Healthcare ethicist, the second edition of the Core Competencies for Healthcare Ethics Consultation report recently published by the American Society for Humanities and Bioethics. The question is posed: can the competencies identified in the report serve as the core competencies for Roman Catholic ethical consultants and consultation services? I answer in the negative. This incongruence stems from divergent concepts of what it means to do ethics consultation, a divergence that is rooted in each perspective's very different visions of autonomy. Furthermore, because of the constitutive elements of Catholic ethics consultation, such as the Ethical and Religious Directives for Health Care Services, the tradition needed to apply those directives, and the Catholic facility’s membership in the institutional Church, the competencies needed for its practice differ in kind from those identified by the report. While there are many practical points of convergence, the competencies identified by the report should not be adopted uncritically by Catholic healthcare institutions as core competencies for ethical consultation services.     

Corporate influences on epidemiology

Corporate influences on epidemiology have become stronger and more pervasive in the last few decades, particularly in the contentious fields of pharmacoepidemiology and occupational epidemiology. For every independent epidemiologist studying the side effects of medicines and the hazardous effects of industrial chemicals, there are several other epidemiologists hired by industry to attack the research and to debunk it as 'junk science'. In some instances these activities have gone as far as efforts to block publication. In many instances, academics have accepted industry funding which has not been acknowledged, and only the academic affiliations of the company-funded consultants have been listed. These activities are major threats to the integrity of the field, and its survival as a scientific discipline. There is no simple solution to these problems. However, for the last two decades there has been substantial discussion on ethics in epidemiology, partly in response to the unethical conduct of many industry-funded consultants. Professional organizations, such as the International Epidemiological Association, can play a major role in encouraging and supporting epidemiologists to assert positive principles of how science should work, and how it should be applied to public policy decisions, rather than simply having a list of what not to do.