Effects of an educational programme on shared decision‐making among Korean nurses

This study was conducted to examine the effects of an educational programme on shared decision‐making on end‐of‐life care performance, moral sensitivity and attitude towards shared decision‐making among Korean nurses. A quasi‐experimental study with a non‐equivalent control group pretest–posttest design was used. Forty‐one clinical nurses were recruited as participants from two different university hospitals located in Daegu, Korea. Twenty nurses in the control group received no intervention, and 21 nurses in the experimental group received the educational programme on shared decision‐making. Data were collected with a questionnaire covering end‐of‐life care performance, moral sensitivity and attitude towards shared decision‐making. Analysis of the data was done with the chi‐square test, t‐test and Fisher's exact test using SPSS/Win 17.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The experimental group showed significantly higher scores in moral sensitivity and attitude towards shared decision‐making after the intervention compared with the control group. This study suggests that the educational programme on shared decision‐making was effective in increasing the moral sensitivity and attitude towards shared decision‐making among Korean nurses.     

The importance of moral emotions for effective collaboration in culturally diverse healthcare teams

Moral emotions shape the effectiveness of culturally diverse teams. However, these emotions, which are integral to determining ethically responsive patient care and team relationships, typically go unrecognised. The contribution of emotions to moral deliberation is subjugated within the technorational environment of healthcare decision‐making. Contemporary healthcare organisations rely on a multicultural workforce charged with the ethical care of vulnerable people. Limited extant literature examines the role of moral emotions in ethical decision‐making among culturally diverse healthcare teams. Moral emotions are evident in ethnocentric moral perspectives that construct some colleagues' practices as ‘other’. This article examines how moral emotions are evoked when cultural dissonance influences nurses' moral perceptions. We use a qualitative investigation of teamwork within culturally diverse healthcare organisations. We use Haidt's ( 2003 ) account of moral emotions to examine practice‐based accounts of 36 internationally educated and 17 New Zealand educated nurses practising in New Zealand. The study provides evidence that moral emotions are frequently elicited by communication and care practices considered ‘foreign’. The main implication is that although safe practice in healthcare organisations is reliant on highly functioning teams, collaboration is challenged by interprofessional power relations of contested culturally shaped values. We address practice‐based strategies that enable engagement with moral emotions to enhance effective teamwork.     

Frequent attenders' experiences of encounters with healthcare personnel: A systematic review of qualitative studies

Rather than measure demographic factors such as socioeconomics, the aim of this study was to examine the lived experience of frequent attenders by synthesizing findings on their encounters with healthcare personnel. The Scopus, CINAHL, PsycARTICLES, and PubMed (Medline) databases were searched in May 2020 in order to screen studies by title and abstract (n = 1794) and full‐text (n = 20). Findings from the included studies (n = 6) were then pooled using meta‐aggregation, yielding the following results: difficulties in resolving frequent attenders' situations may create “service circles,” frustrating patients with their situation; frequent attenders' own expertise regarding their condition should be recognized and valued alongside that of healthcare professionals when performing collaborative care; a lack of empathy and disparagement may make frequent attenders feel misunderstood and unappreciated; frequent attenders should be recognized as individuals by taking their circumstances into account and providing support accordingly. Frequent attenders' experiences demonstrate the importance of shared decision‐making, continuity of care, and acknowledging these patients' individual circumstances. Identifying the variety of frequent attenders' service needs by synthesizing their experiences is a practical way of organizing patient‐centered healthcare services.     

Shared decision‐making in maternity care: Acknowledging and overcoming epistemic defeaters

Shared decision‐making involves health professionals and patients/clients working together to achieve true person‐centred health care. However, this goal is infrequently realized, and most barriers are unknown. Discussion between philosophers, clinicians, and researchers can assist in confronting the epistemic and moral basis of health care, with benefits to all. The aim of this paper is to describe what shared decision‐making is, discuss its necessary conditions, and develop a definition that can be used in practice to support excellence in maternity care. Discussion between the authors, with backgrounds in philosophy, clinical maternity care, health care management, and maternity care research, assisted the team to confront established norms in maternity care and challenge the epistemic and moral basis of decision‐making for caesarean section. The team concluded that shared decision‐making must start in pregnancy and continue throughout labour and birth, with equality in discourse facilitated by the clinician. Clinicians have a duty of care for the adequacy of women's knowledge, which can only be fulfilled when relevant knowledge is offered freely and when personal beliefs and biases that may impinge on decision‐making (defeaters) are disclosed. Informed consent is not shared decision‐making. Key barriers include existing cultural norms of “the doctor knows best” and “patient acquiescence” that prevent defeaters being acknowledged and discussed and can lead to legal challenges, overuse of medical intervention and, in some areas, obstetric violence. Shared decision‐making in maternity care can thus be defined as an enquiry by clinician and expectant woman aimed at deciding upon a course of care or none, which takes the form of a dialogue within which the clinician fulfils their duty of care to the client's knowledge by making available their complete knowledge (based on all types of evidence) and expertise, including an exposition of any relevant and recognized potential defeaters. Research to develop measurement tools is required.     

Ethical and moral considerations of (patient) centredness in nursing and healthcare: Navigating uncharted waters

This discussion paper aims to explore potential ethical and moral implications of (patient) centredness in nursing and healthcare. Healthcare is experiencing a philosophical shift from a perspective where the health professional is positioned as the expert to one that re‐centres care and service provision central to the needs and desires of the persons served. This centred approach to healthcare delivery has gained a moral authority as the right thing to do. However, little attention has been given to its moral and ethical theoretical grounding and potential implications for nurses, persons served and the healthcare system. Based upon a review of academic and grey literature, centredness is proposed as a value‐laden concept in nursing inquiry. Potential moral and ethical implications of centredness on nurses/healthcare providers, persons served and the healthcare system are discussed. These challenges are then considered within the context of normative and relational ethical theories. These perspectives may offer guidance relative to how one should act in those circumstances as well as an understanding as to how interdependency and engagement with the other person(s) can help navigate the challenges of a centred care approach. Viewing centredness through an ethical theoretical lens provides a valuable discourse to nursing in efforts to expand the knowledge base and integrate centred approaches into practice and policy.     

Research Article: Perceptions of Japanese patients and their family about medical treatment decisions

Internationally, nurses and physicians are increasingly expected to undertake roles in communication and patient advocacy, including in Japan, where the reigning principle underlying medical ethics is in transition from paternalism to respect for patient autonomy. The study reports the results of a survey in two Japanese teaching hospitals that clarified the perspectives of 128 patients and 41 family members regarding their current and desired involvement in health decision‐making. The commonest process that was desired by patients and their family was for patients to make decisions after consultation with both the physician and their family. The decision‐making preferences for competent patients varied among the participants, who believed that families have a crucial role to play in health‐care decision‐making, even when patients are competent to make their own decisions. The findings will inform health professionals about contemporary Japanese health‐care decision‐making and the ethical issues involved in this process, as well as assist the future development of a culturally relevant model to support patients' preferences for ethical decision‐making.     

Why patients have a moral obligation to give care to clinicians

Progress is being made in transitioning from clinicians who are torn between caring for patients and populations, to clinicians who are partnering with patients to care for patients as people. However, the focus is still on what patients and others can do for patients, however defined. For clinicians whose interests must be similarly respected for their own sake and because they are integrally related to those of patients, what can and should patients do? Patients can be exempted from some normal social roles but are generally recognized to have moral obligations in health care. One of these obligations is caregiving to clinicians within the limits of each patient's capability. My paper moves this obligation beyond the ceremonial order of etiquette characterizing public statements on how patients should relate to others. It goes beyond a patient‐centred ethic that is consumerist in nature, to a person‐centred one that recognizes patients typically as moral agents who are dignified by recognizing the obligation to give as well as receive care as sincere benevolence. This obligation derives objective justification from divine command. It is also consistent, however, both with what people, if ignorant of their social role, would objectively produce for a hypothetical social contract, and with virtues constitutive of human nature and a relational and communitarian understanding of what it is to be a person. Including sentiment (intuition) and personal conscience, this relational identity makes caregiving intrinsically meaningful, yet caregiving also has an instrumental value to patients and clinicians. Its self‐enforcement by patients will depend on their moral code and on society making caregiving achievable for them. A moral obligation for patient caregiving may then be specified to require patients to reflect on and invest in relationships in which they can feel and show care for others sincerely and respectfully.     

Dignity in health‐care: a critical exploration using feminism and theories of recognition

ARANDA K and JONES A. Nursing Inquiry 2010; 17 : 248–256
Dignity in health‐care: a critical exploration using feminism and theories of recognition Growing concerns over undignified health‐care has meant the concept of dignity is currently much discussed in the British National Health Service. This has led to a number of policies attempting to reinstate dignity as a core ethical value governing nursing practice and health‐care provision. Yet these initiatives continue to draw upon a concept of dignity which remains reliant upon a depoliticised, ahistorical and decontexualised subject. In this paper, we argue the need to revise the dignity debate through the lens of feminism and theories of recognition. Postmodern feminist theories provide major challenges to what remain dominant liberal approaches as they pay attention to the contingent, reflexive, and affective aspects of care work. Theories of recognition provide a further critical resource for understanding how moral obligations and responsibilities towards others and our public and private responses to difference arise. This re‐situates dignity as a highly contested and politicised concept involving complex moral deliberations and diverse political claims of recognition. The dignity debate is thus moved beyond simplistic rational injunctions to care, or to care more, and towards critical discussions of complex politicised, moral practices infused with power that involve the recognition of difference in health‐care.     

Ethical decision making for high-risk infants. The parents' perspective

The experiences of 32 families with high-risk infants provide the foundation for a discussion of the parents' perception of the ethical dimension of intensive newborn care. The families' focus on the need for support in the NICU crisis rather than a plea for rights, justice, and autonomous decision making leads to a suggested professional response guided by an ethic of care. Through a caring professional, ethical decision making in the NICU can be implemented to encompass a shared moral responsibility for the high-risk infant during this process.     

Ethical issues in clinical research. Informed consent and risks versus benefits in the treatment of primary hypertension

Clinical research involves a number of ethical issues for the nurse researcher and clinician. When new treatments, such as experimental drugs, are used in patient care, the issues of informed consent to treatment and the balancing of risks and benefits may be especially difficult to resolve. By understanding the functions and elements of informed consent, nurses can assist their patients to ask for and to comprehend the information they need to be truly and fully informed about treatment choices. Likewise, assessing the risks and benefits of an experimental treatment option, such as an experimental drug for the treatment of primary hypertension, may be important to the long-term health of patients. Nurses assist patient decision making and the assessment of relevant risks and benefits by being fully informed about the planned research and by applying knowledge of ethical principles to patient care. When nurses incorporate this type of ethical reflection and moral skill into nursing practice, they meet minimal moral obligations to patients.     

Patient participation in clinical decision-making in nursing: A comparative study of nurses' and patients' perceptions

Aims and objectives. The aim of this study was to compare the degree of concordance between patients and Registered Nurses’ perceptions of the patients’ preferences for participation in clinical decision‐making in nursing care. A further aim was to compare patients’ experienced participation with their preferred participatory role. Background. Patient participation in clinical decision‐making is valuable and has an effect on quality of care. However, there is limited knowledge about patient preferences for participation and how nurses perceive their patients’ preferences. Methods. A comparative design was adopted with a convenient sample of 80 nurse–patient dyads. A modified version of the Control Preference Scale was used in conjunction with a questionnaire developed to elicit the experienced participation of the patient. Results. A majority of the Registered Nurses perceived that their patients preferred a higher degree of participation in decision‐making than did the patients. Differences in patient preferences were found in relation to age and social status but not to gender. Patients often experienced having a different role than what was initially preferred, e.g. a more passive role concerning needs related to communication, breathing and pain and a more active role related to activity and emotions/roles. Conclusions. Registered Nurses are not always aware of their patients’ perspective and tend to overestimate patients’ willingness to assume an active role. Registered Nurses do not successfully involve patients in clinical decision‐making in nursing care according to their own perceptions and not even to the patients’ more moderate preferences of participation. Relevance to clinical practice. A thorough assessment of the individual's preferences for participation in decision‐making seems to be the most appropriate approach to ascertain patient's involvement to the preferred level of participation. The categorization of patients as preferring a passive role, collaborative role or active role is seen as valuable information for Registered Nurses to tailor nursing care.     

Nurses' responses to ethical dilemmas in nursing practice: meta-analysis

Title. Nurses’ responses to ethical dilemmas in nursing practice: meta‐analysis. Aim. This paper is a report of a study to explore nurses’ responses to ethical dilemmas in daily nursing practice. Background. Concern about nurses’ ethical competence is growing. Most nurses perceived that there were barriers in their work environment to ethical practice, compromising their ability to perform ethically. Since most research focuses on contextual barriers to nurses’ ethical practice, little is known about how nurses involve themselves in ethical decision‐making and action in daily care. Method. A meta‐analysis of nurses’ ethical behaviour was conducted using data from nine studies in four countries (n = 1592 registered nurses). In all studies, the Ethical Behaviour Test was used to measure nurses’ ethical responses, based on an adapted version of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. Data were analysed using random‐intercept regression analysis. Findings. All groups, except the expert group, displayed a uniform pattern of conventional ethical reasoning and practice. When nurses were faced with ethical dilemmas, they tended to use conventions as their predominant decision‐guiding criteria rather than patients’ personal needs and well‐being. Conclusion. Conformist practice (following conventions rather than pursuing good for the patient) constitutes a major barrier for nurses to take the appropriate ethical actions, as creativity and critical reflection are absent. There is an urgent need to find ways to promote nurses’ ethical development from conventional to postconventional ethical practice. More research is needed to strengthen existing empirical evidence.     

Does shared decision making respect a patient's relational autonomy?

According to many of its proponents, shared decision making (“SDM”) is the right way to interpret the clinician‐patient relationship because it respects patient autonomy in decision‐making contexts. In particular, medical ethicists have claimed that SDM respects a patient's relational autonomy understood as a capacity that depends upon, and can only be sustained by, interpersonal relationships as well as broader health care and social conditions. This paper challenges that claim. By considering two primary approaches to relational autonomy, this paper argues that standard accounts of SDM actually undermine patient autonomy. It also provides an overview of the obligations generated by the principle of respect for relational autonomy that have not been captured in standard accounts of SDM and which are necessary to ensure consistency between clinical practice and respect for patient autonomy.     

A case study exploring the ethical and policy dimensions of allocating acute care resources to a dying patient

Aims. We aimed to identify policy, process and ethical issues related to allocation of National Health Service resources when patients with end‐of‐life illness are referred to acute care services. Background. Sharing healthcare decisions denotes a different partnership between professionals and patients when patients are empowered to define their needs. Implementation of a transition from professional to patient decision‐making appears to be dependent upon its interpretation by personnel delivering care using the local trust policy. The outcome of this is a reformation of responsibility for budget allocation, choice of acute care provider and selecting services, currently in the realm of primary care; be it the general practitioner, community practitioners, or the patient. Design. We used a ‘lens’ approach to case study analysis in which the lens is constructed of a model of policy analysis and four principles of biomedical ethics. A patient's decision to decline care proposed by an Accident and Emergency department nurse and the nurse's response to that decision expose a policy that restricts the use of ambulance transport and with that, flexibility in responses to patients’ decisions. Findings. End‐of‐life care partnership decisions require sensitivity and flexibility from all healthcare practitioners. We found that policy‐based systems currently used to deliver care across the primary care – hospital care border are far from seamless and can lead to foreseeable problems. Conclusions. Health professionals responsible for the care of a patient at the end of life should consider the holistic outcomes of resource allocation decisions for patients. Relevance to clinical practice. Government and health professional agenda suggest that patients should be given a greater element of control over their healthcare than has historically been the case. When patients take responsibility for their decisions, healthcare personnel should recognize that this signals a shift in the nature of the professional–patient relationship to one of partnership.     

Shared decision making: evaluation of German medical students' preferences

Rationale Current medical student perceptions of patient centredness and the priorities of students for a change in medical care were investigated. Methods We conducted an observational study using questionnaires at the University of Leipzig in Germany. In total, 188 consecutive medical students attending the Department of General Medicine participated in this study. We investigated students’ priorities for an improvement in medical care related to aspects of the patient–doctor relationship and to aspects of organization. Results Receiving more information and undergoing the process of shared decision making was the most important choice; selected by 43.2% as their first priority. The second choice was found to be consultation time (16.2%) which also refers to the patient–doctor relationship. Shorter queues for tests, also considered important for more patient autonomy, were ranked third (14.6%). Medical students participating in this study were least interested in access to specialists, cost of medications and continuity of care. Conclusion For the first time, it is shown that shared decision making, in addition to its many benefits, is not only a patients’, but also a prospective doctors’ top priority. Consequently, medical student training programmes might incorporate shared decision‐making training as an important element of patient centredness.     

Shared decision‐making in mental and behavioural health interventions

Elements of shared decision‐making (ie, collaboration, patient preferences, and working alliance) have long been discussed and studied in the field of clinical psychology; however, research indicates that shared decision‐making is not typically used in clinical practice. Instead, clinicians often rely on a paternalistic approach. In this article, we provide a narrative review of the existing research supporting shared decision‐making for mental and behavioural health concerns, we discuss several barriers that impede its use in actual clinical practice, and we provide recommendations for increasing shared decision‐making when working with patients.     

Commitment to health: a shared ethical bond between professions

It is commonly assumed that Codes of Ethics are supported by concrete ethical principles, that adherence to Codes of Ethics guarantees ethical behaviour and that there is widespread agreement about ethical standards. Each of these assumptions is false. Codes of Ethics are inevitably open to wide interpretation, and it is impossible to demonstrate absolute moral standards. Health and social care workers should not adhere to unexplained 'ethical principles' insufficient to guide practical decision making. Anyone who recognises that all human actions potentially have ethical content may choose to make an ethical commitment. In order to work for health, health workers ought to commit to a substantial theory of health. One such theory--the foundations theory of health--is briefly explained and illustrated. The foundations theory can form a shared ethical bond between health and social care professionals, since both professions regularly strive to achieve foundational health for their patients and clients.