Nudging in Neonatology: Practical Wisdom and Accountability for Reasonableness

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Stanak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care Units ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Value Judgments ◽  
Accountability For Reasonableness ◽  
Limit Of Viability

ObjectivesThe way choice is presented has an impact on decision-making. This is the case also in the context of neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), particularly in the challenging cases that concern the limit of viability. The objective of this article is to examine the role of nudging in the shared decision-making in neonatology and elaborate on the respective moral challenges.ResultsNudging is not morally neutral. There are two key sources of ethical issues at the heart of nudging. The first one concerns the lack of transparency, while the second concerns the background value judgments that are imminent whenever nudging is used for achieving a particular end. To solve the underlying conflict, a virtue ethics approach combined with the accountability for reasonableness framework is suggested to guide the use of the tool of nudging.ConclusionsNICU professionals ought to use the tool of nudging transparently in line with their act of profession and their practically wise judgment.

The Role of Shared Decision-Making in Audiologic Rehabilitation

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behavior Changes ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Treatment Information ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Audiologic Rehabilitation

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.

The role of a shared decision-making process in paediatric epilepsy surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 429 ◽  
pp. 119162
Author(s):  
Michelle Gratton ◽  
Bonnie Wooten ◽  
Sandrine Deribaupierre ◽  
Andrea Andrade
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Epilepsy Surgery ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Paediatric Epilepsy

Neonatal nurse practitioner ethics knowledge and attitudes

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 2247-2258
Author(s):  
Mobolaji Famuyide ◽  
Caroline Compretta ◽  
Melanie Ellis
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Ethical Decision ◽  
Ethical Decision Making ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Neonatal Nurse Practitioners

Background: Neonatal nurse practitioners have become the frontline staff exposed to a myriad of ethical issues that arise in the day-to-day environment of the neonatal intensive care unit. However, ethics competency at the time of graduation and after years of practice has not been described. Research aim: To examine the ethics knowledge base of neonatal nurse practitioners as this knowledge relates to decision making in the neonatal intensive care unit and to determine whether this knowledge is reflected in attitudes toward ethical dilemmas in the neonatal intensive care unit. Research design: This was a prospective cohort study that examined decision making at the threshold of viability, life-sustaining therapies for sick neonates, and a ranking of the five most impactful ethical issues. Participants and research context: All 47 neonatal nurse practitioners who had an active license in the State of Mississippi were contacted via e-mail. Surveys were completed online using Survey Monkey software. Ethical considerations: The study was approved by the University of Mississippi Medical Center Institutional Review Board (IRB; #2015-0189). Findings: Of the neonatal nurse practitioners who completed the survey, 87.5% stated that their religious practices affected their ethical decision making and 76% felt that decisions regarding life-sustaining treatment for a neonate should not involve consultation with the hospital’s legal team or risk management. Only 11% indicated that the consent process involved patient understanding of possible procedures. Participating in the continuation or escalation of care for infants at the threshold of viability was the top ethical issue encountered by neonatal nurse practitioners. Discussion: Our findings reflect deficiencies in the neonatal nurse practitioner knowledge base concerning ethical decision making, informed consent/permission, and the continuation/escalation of care. Conclusion: In addition to continuing education highlighting ethics concepts, exploring the influence of religion in making decisions and knowing the most prominent dilemmas faced by neonatal nurse practitioners in the neonatal intensive care unit may lead to insights into potential solutions.

scholarly journals Computer knows best? The need for value-flexibility in medical AI

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind J McDougall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Patient Autonomy ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Value Judgements ◽  
The Relationship

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being developed for use in medicine, including for diagnosis and in treatment decision making. The use of AI in medical treatment raises many ethical issues that are yet to be explored in depth by bioethicists. In this paper, I focus specifically on the relationship between the ethical ideal of shared decision making and AI systems that generate treatment recommendations, using the example of IBM’s Watson for Oncology. I argue that use of this type of system creates both important risks and significant opportunities for promoting shared decision making. If value judgements are fixed and covert in AI systems, then we risk a shift back to more paternalistic medical care. However, if designed and used in an ethically informed way, AI could offer a potentially powerful way of supporting shared decision making. It could be used to incorporate explicit value reflection, promoting patient autonomy. In the context of medical treatment, we need value-flexible AI that can both respond to the values and treatment goals of individual patients and support clinicians to engage in shared decision making.

How shared is shared decision-making? A care-ethical view on the role of partner and family

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 637-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge van Nistelrooij ◽  
Merel Visse ◽  
Ankana Spekkink ◽  
Jasmijn de Lange
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Ethical View

scholarly journals Two Training-Load Paradoxes: Can We Work Harder and Smarter, Can Physical Preparation and Medical Be Teammates?

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (s2) ◽  
pp. S2-50-S2-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim J. Gabbett ◽  
Rod Whiteley
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Support Staff ◽  
Training Load ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
And Training ◽  
Physical Preparation

The authors have observed that in professional sporting organizations the staff responsible for physical preparation and medical care typically practice in relative isolation and display tension as regards their attitudes toward training-load prescription (much more and much less training, respectively). Recent evidence shows that relatively high chronic training loads, when they are appropriately reached, are associated with reduced injury risk and better performance. Understanding this link between performance and training loads removes this tension but requires a better understanding of the relationship between the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) and its association with performance and injury. However, there remain many questions in the area of ACWR, and we are likely at an early stage of our understanding of these parameters and their interrelationships. This opinion paper explores these themes and makes recommendations for improving performance through better synergies in support-staff approaches. Furthermore, aspects of the ACWR that remain to be clarified—the role of shared decision making, risk:benefit estimation, and clearer accountability—are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document