Ethical issues in the managed care setting: a new curriculum for primary care physicians

Several challenging ethical issues have been associated with the shift to managed healthcare in the United States. Our objective was to develop, implement, and evaluate a curriculum designed to help physicians identify and examine ethical issues encountered in the managed care setting. The curriculum was developed during a year-long workshop at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center. The content of the curriculum was established through literature review, focus group discussions with physicians, and a needs assessment of targeted learners (primary care physicians practicing in managed care settings). Some of the key issues addressed in the curriculum include: changing professional responsibilities of physicians; fair use of resources; and threats to the doctor-patient relationship as a consequence of the new healthcare delivery system. The 7.5-h curriculum was taught over five sessions using varied teaching methods. Evaluations demonstrated that the curriculum was successful in increasing learner awareness of ethical issues confronted in the managed care environment and improved learner knowledge in these areas. The physician-learners reported that this educational experience would change their teaching of medical students and residents. After completing the curriculum, learners felt that they were at least somewhat better able to cope with ethical challenges encountered in the managed care setting. Future research might examine whether such a curriculum could positively affect physician behavior or enhance physician satisfaction with the managed care setting.     

The case for managed care: reappraising medical and socio-political ideals

The arguments against managed care can be divided into two general clusters. One cluster concerns the way managed care undermines the ethical ideals of medical professionalism. Since those ideals largely focus on the physician-patient relation, the first cluster comes under the rubric of micro-ethics; namely, the ethics of individual-individual relations. The second cluster of criticisms focuses on macro-ethical issues, primarily on issues of justice and policy. By reviewing these arguments, it becomes clear that managed care does not easily fit within traditional modes of ethical analysis. It poses a radical challenge to current medical and socio-political norms, and even resists the distinction between micro- and macro-ethical domains, a distinction that reflects the private/public distinction. Managed care organizations call for a third way, an inter-ethic for middle level organizations. The essays in this Journal provide a first step in this radical reassessment, laying the foundation for an organizational ethic that is responsive to the realities and promise of managed care.     

Moral authority, power, and trust in clinical ethics

Moral concerns about the authority, power, and trustworthiness of physicians have become important topics in clinical ethics during the past three decades. These concerns have come to greater prominence with the increasing involvement of large-scale private institutions in the organization and delivery of medical services, especially managed care organizations, and with the increasing involvement of government in the payment for and organization and delivery of medical services. When physicians act as the agents of large institutions or governments. the power of physicians over their patients increases. The purposes of this article are (1) to reflect briefly on the historical origins of the moral problem of physicians' power in medicine, and (2) to introduce the articles in the 1999 annual number of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy on topics in clinical ethics.     

Poland: biomedical ethics in a socialist state

In one of a Hastings Center Report series of four country reports, a professor of ethics discusses the Polish approach to ethical issues in health care. Szawarski begins by outlining five factors that influence the practice of medicine in Poland: a socialist form of government, the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, an ongoing economic crisis, the legacy of the Nazi death camps, and a lack of formal instruction in biomedical ethics. He then discusses three current ethical concerns of physicians, patients, and the public: regulation of physician conduct, abortion, and in vitro fertilization. There is little formal public debate of the issues, however, and physicians seem committed to upholding traditional medical codes of ethics without analyzing underlying moral principles and justifications.     

Bluffing, puffing and spinning in managed-care organizations

I argue that because bluffing, puffing, and spinning are features of corporate life, they are likely to characterize the doctor-patient relationship in managed care medicine. I show that managed-care organizations (MCOs) and the physicians who contract with them make liberal use of puffing and spinning. In this way, they create a context in which it is likely that patients will also use deceptive mechanisms. Unfortunately, patients risk their health when they deceive their doctors. Using the warranty theory of truth I argue that although bluffing may be ethical in business because all participants agree to it and business has not warranted truth-telling, it is not ethical in a medical context because physicians and MCOs have warranted truth-telling and the quality of medical care depends on it.     

Clinical equipoise and the incoherence of research ethics

The doctrine of clinical equipoise is appealing because it appears to permit physicians to maintain their therapeutic obligation to offer optimal medical care to patients while conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The appearance, however, is deceptive. In this article we argue that clinical equipoise is defective and incoherent in multiple ways. First, it conflates the sound methodological principle that RCTs should begin with an honest null hypothesis with the questionable ethical norm that participants in these trials should never be randomized to an intervention known to be inferior to standard treatment. Second, the claim that RCTs preserve the therapeutic obligation of physicians misrepresents the patient-centered orientation of medical care. Third, the appeal to clinical equipoise as a basic principle of risk-benefit assessment for RCTs is incoherent. Finally, the difficulties with clinical equipoise cannot be resolved by viewing it as a presumptive principle subject to exceptions. In the final sections of the article, we elaborate on the non-exploitation framework for the ethics clinical research and indicate issues that warrant further inquiry.     

The importance of management for understanding managed care

This paper argues that the concept of management is critically important for understanding managed care. A proper interpretation of management is needed before a positive account of the ethics of managed care can be constructed. The paper discusses three aspects of management: administrative, clinical, and resource management, and compares the central commitments of traditional medical practice with those of managed care for each of these aspects. In so doing, the distinctive conceptual features of the managed care paradigm are discussed. The paper concludes by arguing that the concept of management implicit in the managed care paradigm affords a basis for building a more adequate ethic of managed care.     

Teaching evidence-based medicine to undergraduate medical students: a course integrating ethics, audit, management and clinical epidemiology

A six-week full time course for third-year undergraduate medical students at Imperial College uniquely links evidence-based medicine (EBM) with ethics and the management of change in health services. It is mounted jointly by the Medical and Business Schools and features an experiential approach. Small teams of students use a problem-based strategy to address practical issues identified from a range of clinical placements in primary and secondary care settings. The majority of these junior clinical students achieve important objectives for learning about teamwork, critical appraisal, applied ethics and health care organisations. Their work often influences the care received by patients in the host clinical units. We discuss the strengths of the course in relation to other accounts of programmes in EBM. We give examples of recurring experiences from successive cohorts and discuss assessment issues and how our multi-phasic evaluation informs evolution of the course and the potential for future developments.     

Cost Containment,DRGs, and The Ethics of Health Care

This series of articles by Charles Dougherty, Robert Berenson, and Kathleen Powderly and Elaine Smith, as well as “Cost Containment: Challenging Fidelity and Justice” by E. Haavi Morreim (Hastings Center Report, December 1988), result from a Hastings Center project, “Ethics and Prospective Payment Systems: DRGs.” The two-year project was jointly funded by The General Electric Foundation and the American Medical Association Education and Research Foundation. The project tried to gauge the systematic effects of the introduction of cost containment strategies, prospective payment by Diagnostic Related Groups in particular, on the provision of health care and the ethical practice of medicine. Cost containment strategies, no matter how necessary in curbing spiraling medical costs, leave no sector or participants in the health care system untouched—hospitals and other health care institutions; doctors, nurses, social workers and other health care professionals; patients, their families, and the thirty-six to forty million medically indigent. The articles discuss the several and interrelated ethical issues raised by the DRG prospective payment system (Dougherty); its particular affect on the doctor-patient relationship and how it is transforming the ethical practice of medicine (Berenson and Morreim); and its specific impact on the professions and professional ethics of nursing and social work (Powderly and Smith). The overall message of the articles is that the health professions, their provision of care, and the ethics of their practices—as driven by economic considerations and realities—are in the midst of a more or less radical sea change.     

Upstream ethics in nanomedicine: a call for research

Insufficient attention has been given to ethical and social issues integral to nanomedicine. Part of this deficiency arises from some mistaken assumptions about ethics. I consider five of these: that ethics is only important when a technology is mature (reactionary ethics); that there are no new ethical issues in nanomedicine; that ethics involves a kind of risk assessment that is already being conducted; that ethics is a hindrance to science; and that ethics is a luxury for an ideal world. After critically assessing these assumptions, I consider two types of nanomedicine and the kinds of ethical issues they raise. Type 1 nanomedicine is of an incremental kind, and proper ethical assessment of the issues must involve a fine grained study of the specific application. Type 2 nanomedicine is of a more foundational, programmatic kind. Ethical issues raised by these more programmatic developments include challenges integral to formation of interdisciplinary teams; issues related to intellectual property, authorship and publication; development of informed consent and confidentiality protections associated with new data sets; future challenges to the clinician-patient relation and personalized medicine. Ethical analysis should also consider some of the reductionistic implications of engineering models and metaphors integral to nanomedicine, as well as uses of nanomedicine for non-medical purposes, such as human enhancement. Many of these challenges concern rate-limiting steps in nanomedical research, and they should be prominently featured in developing nanomedicine initiatives.     

Implicit Cognition and Gifts: How Does social Psychology help Us Think Differently about Medical Practice?

This article takes the following two assumptions for granted: first, that gifts influence physicians and, second, that the influences gifts have on physicians may be harmful for patients. These assumptions are common in the applied ethics literature, and they prompt an obvious practical question, namely, what is the best way to mitigate the negative effects? We examine the negative effects of gift giving in depth, considering how the influence occurs, and we assert that the ethical debate surrounding gift‐giving practices must be reoriented. Our main claim is that the failure of recent policies addressing gift giving can be traced to a misunderstanding of what psychological mechanisms are most likely to underpin physicians’ biased behavior as a result of interaction with the medical industry. The problem with gift giving is largely not a matter of malicious or consciously self‐interested behavior, but of well‐intentioned actions on the part of physicians that are nonetheless perniciously infected by the presence of the medical industry. Substantiating this claim will involve elaboration on two points. First, we will retrace the history of policies regarding gift giving between the medical profession and the medical industry and highlight how most policies assume a rationalistic view of moral agency. Reliance on this view of agency is best illustrated by past attempts to address gift giving in terms of conflicts of interest. Second, we will introduce and motivate an alternate view of moral agency emerging from recent literature in social psychology on implicit social cognition. We will show that proper consideration of implicit social cognition paints a picture of human psychology at odds with the rationalistic model assumed in discussions of COIs. With these two pieces on the table we will be able to show that, without fully appreciating the social‐psychological mechanisms (both cognitive and affective) of implicit cognition, policy‐makers are likely to overlook significant aspects of how gifts influence doctors.     

Health Care Reform and the Future of Physician Ethics

Health care reform proposals threaten to exacerbate tensions physicians already face in trying to balance traditional duties to individual patients against increasing pressure to serve broader societal and institutional goals. To cope with reform, medical ethics must clarify physicians' moral obligations, change existing ethical codes, and develop an ethics of institutions.     

The nature and limits of the physician's professional responsibilities: surgical ethics, matters of conscience, and managed care

The nature and limits of the physician's professional responsibilities constitute core topics in clinical ethics. These responsibilities originate in the physician's professional role, which was first examined in the modern English-language literature of medical ethics by two eighteenth-century British physician-ethicists, John Gregory and Thomas Percival. The papers in this annual clinical ethics number of the Journal explore the physician's professional responsibilities in the areas of surgical ethics, matters of conscience, and managed care.     

Unhealthy Partnerships and Public Health: Breaking Free of Industry

In the ambitious new book The Perils of Partnership: Industry Influence, Institutional Integrity, and Public Health, Jonathan Marks argues that far too much baggage is being piled on an old workhorse, conflict of interest. It’s an important concept, he asserts, but public‐sector actors can transgress their ethical obligations even when their relations with industry don’t create conflicts of interest. Yet policy‐makers have been immersed in public‐private partnerships for so long that they do not see the broader implications of such relationships. Marks aims to move the discourse from reassuring terms like “engagement” and “inclusiveness” to concepts that capture the problematic side of the liaisons, like “webs of influence” and “agenda distortion.” Above all, he issues a challenge to public health policy‐makers: Ditch the comfortable hand‐in‐hand industry relationships, which prioritize efficacy over ethics, threatening both the public’s health and the integrity of public health institutions. Adopt instead a paradigm that is “mano a mano,” involving tension, struggle, and, at times, direct conflict with private industry.     

Ethical challenges of chronic illness

This Hastings Center Report supplement is derived from the Center's three-year "Ethics and Chronic Illness" project. The project was premised on the idea that chronic illness is a distinctive experience, and that chronic care is different in nature from the acute care that is the current focus of American medicine. In our aging society, the prospect of widespread disability and chronic illness is "a spectre haunting the American health care system." The reality of chronic illness could transform many pervasive assumptions about medical goals and ethics. With this report, the authors intend to stimulate a broader discussion of the ethical issues distinctive to chronic illness, and to outline an agenda for future bioethical investigation. They also hope to articulate the rudiments of a moral vision to guide the health care system, welfare services, families, and communities as they face the challenges of providing chronic care.     

To save a fetus, should a brain-dead woman be kept 'alive'

Brief summaries are presented of an article and two editorials which appeared in the 3 September 1982 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association on the clinical and ethical issues involved in deciding whether to provide life support treatment for pregnant women who are irreversibly comatose or brain dead. The article, by William P. Dillon and four other physicians, describes the contrasting decisions they made in two actual cases. The editorials, one by Mark Siegler and Daniel Wikler and the other by Robert M. Veatch, discuss broad issues of how these patients should be treated and who should decide.     

Ethical responsibility in the German Democratic Republic

The chairman of the German Democratic Republic's (GDR) Committee on Medical Ethics, the Council of Medical Sciences, reviews issues of ethical concern to East German medicine. According to Tanneberger, ethical conflicts in health care are avoided in the GDR largely due to the socialist nature of public services. Ethical problems in medicine primarily involve research with human subjects, with animal experimentation and implementation of biomedical technologies as topics of interest as well. A nationwide system of ethical guidance and control has been created, headed by the Council of Medical Sciences and including the scientific councils of the individual medical disciplines and of the main research projects supported by the state, as well as the faculties of the medical universities. Tanneberger emphasizes that in the GDR, the intention is to develop a sense of responsibility among all those involved in medical research, rather than to impose a regulatory system.     

Ethical Use of Social Media Data: Beyond the Clinical Context

In “Social Media, e‐Health, and Medical Ethics,” in this issue of the Hastings Center Report, Mélanie Terrasse, Moti Gorin, and Dominic Sisti address and suggest recommendations for several ethical issues central to the systematic ethical analysis of the effects of social media on clinical practice, health services research, and public health. The topic is as timely as it is important: social media data collected by device and web applications are constantly increasing and might have both individual and public health benefits. The authors focus their analysis primarily on the health care context. Yet the implications of the intersection of social media data and research warrant focused consideration, as even the most thorough ethical analysis in the clinical context is not necessarily directly applicable in the research context. While many ethical issues are present in both settings, the research context poses new challenges and calls for consideration of distinct factors. In particular, because the legal framework is less protective in research, critical ethical analysis of the research‐specific issues and considerations is essential to the ethical conduct of research using social media data as well as to the design and operation of social media device and web applications themselves.     

Twelve tips to avoid ethical pitfalls when recruiting students as subjects in medical education research

Medical education research has unique characteristics that raise their own set of ethical issues, which differ significantly from those commonly found in clinical research. In contexts where researchers have a dual role as teachers, free consent to participate in research may be undermined and students’ data must be kept confidential from faculty who play any role in their academic or professional path. Faculty members who recruit students as research subjects within their institution for education research should pay particular attention to ensure students’ consent to participate is indeed free and continuous and that their privacy is adequately protected. A good understanding of ethical standards and of the appropriate strategies to fulfill them is essential to conduct ethical medical education research and to ensure ethics approval is obtained. These twelve tips draw from the Declaration of Helsinki, from the ICMJE recommendations and from the example of their application to medical education research in a Canadian and North American context. They aim to act as a reminder and as a guide to address the main ethical issues which should be given proper consideration when designing a study involving students as subjects for medical education research.     

Doctor does not know best: why in the new century physicians must stop trying to benefit patients

While twentieth-century medical ethics has focused on the duty of physicians to benefit their patients, the next century will see that duty challenged in three ways. First, we will increasingly recognize that it is unrealistic to expect physicians to be able to determine what will benefit their patients. Either they limit their attention to medical well-being when total well-being is the proper end of the patient or they strive for total well-being, which takes them beyond their expertise. Even within the medical sphere, they have no basis for choosing among the proper medical goals for medicine. Also, there are many plausible strategies for relating predicted benefits to harms, and physicians cannot be expert in picking among these strategies. Second, increasingly plausible ethical systems recognize that in some cases, patient benefit must be sacrificed to protect patient rights including the right to the truth, to have promises kept, to have autonomy respected, and to not be killed. Third, ethics of the next century will increasingly recognize that some patient benefits must be sacrificed to fulfill duties to others - either the duty to serve the interests of others or other duties such as keeping promises, telling the truth, and, particularly, promoting justice. Physicians in the twenty-first century will be seen as having a new, more limited duty to assist the patient in pursuing the patient's understanding of the patient's interest within the constraints of deontological ethical principles and externally imposed duties to promote justice. The result will be a duty to be loyal to the consumer of health care with the recognition that often this will mean that the physician is not permitted to pursue the physician's understanding of the patient's well-being.