scholarly journals Introducing clinical ethics consultation service in Malaysia: A SWOT analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erwin Jiayuan Khoo ◽  
Siew Houy Chua ◽  
Meow-Keong Thong ◽  
Bin Alwi Zilfalil ◽  
John Lantos
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Swot Analysis ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
National Level ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Cultural Barriers ◽  
Consultation Service ◽  
Insight Into

Clinical ethics consultation service remains undeveloped in developing countries. It is recognised that its introduction poses challenges. Malaysia, a multicultural society with diverse religions, values and perceptions further complicate the introduction of formal clinical ethics consultation service. Clinicians attending a national congress workshop completed a Strengths–Weaknesses–Opportunities–Threats analysis. The aim was to gain insight into clinician’s expectations and promote initiatives leading to the introduction of clinical ethics consultation service. Clinicians agree that clinical ethics consultation service can improve quality of care, reduce healthcare costs and advocate for patients and providers. The analysis highlighted constraints in sufficient critical mass of relevant expertise and restricted opportunities for training. The opportunities lie in education, curriculum development and availability of dedicated proponents. Cultural barriers, limited resources, lack of awareness, differences in opinions, fear of litigation and destructive influence of social media are seen as threats to the introduction of clinical ethics consultation service. This study illustrates the value of involving stakeholders when introducing clinical ethics consultation service formally. The issues identified will inform the strategic directions for the delivery of clinical ethics consultation service at a national level.

scholarly journals Institute of Medical Ethics Guidelines for confirmation of appointment, promotion and recognition of UK bioethics and medical ethics researchers

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 289-291
Author(s):  
Lucy Frith ◽  
Carwyn Hooper ◽  
Silvia Camporesi ◽  
Thomas Douglas ◽  
Anna Smajdor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
Disciplinary Background ◽  
Ethics Guidelines

This document is designed to give guidance on assessing researchers in bioethics/medical ethics. It is intended to assist members of selection, confirmation and promotion committees, who are required to assess those conducting bioethics research when they are not from a similar disciplinary background. It does not attempt to give guidance on the quality of bioethics research, as this is a matter for peer assessment. Rather it aims to give an indication of the type, scope and amount of research that is the expected in this field. It does not cover the assessment of other activities such as teaching, policy work, clinical ethics consultation and so on, but these will be mentioned for additional context. Although it mentions the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF), it is not intended to be a detailed analysis of the place of bioethics in the REF.

Quality Assessment of Clinical Ethics Consultation. Reflection on the Applicability of the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (Special Issue) ◽  
pp. 134-134
Author(s):  
Stephan Nadolny ◽  
◽  
Andre Nowak ◽  
Nicolas Heirich ◽  
Jan Schildmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Process Quality ◽  
Ethical Analysis ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Quality Assessment Tool ◽  
Essential Components

"Background. Clinical ethics consultation has been implemented in many health care institutions. Different methods exist for their evaluation. In this paper we present findings from an evaluation of 21 documentation conducted 2019-2020 by means of the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool (ECQAT). The applicability of the instrument was analyzed based on a) duration of use, b) ease of use, c) comprehensibility of the items. Results. On average, the analysis with the ECQAT takes 11 minutes per protocol. The greatest difficulties in applying the ECQAT arise a) in assessing the counselling-related information and b) in assessing the ethical analysis as well as the recommendations. Here, different demands on the level of detail of the information may lead to different assessments. Furthermore, the transitions of the ethical analysis and the recommendations, which are relevant for the assessment, could not be delimited exactly in parts of the protocols. Discussion. The assessment of documentation represents a limited part of the quality of ethics consultation. In particular, the quality dimensions of the EQAT do not map communicative elements of process quality, which are essential components (if not the core) of ethics consultations. Moreover, the assessment is strongly depending on the format of the protocols, which, depending on the institution, range from a brief overview of the results to a detailed account. Even in light of aforementioned limitations the ECQAT provides an incentive to improve the process quality of (documented) ethics consultation. "

Building a Vibrant Clinical Ethics Consultation Service

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-38
Author(s):  
Courtenay R. Bruce ◽  
Jocelyn Lapointe ◽  
Peter Koch ◽  
Katarina Lee ◽  
Savitri Fedson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Consultation Service

Lessons learned from nurses’ requests for ethics consultation: Why did they call and what did they value?

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 601-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia L Bartlett ◽  
Stuart G Finder
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Service Quality ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Consultation Service ◽  
Consultation Services

Background: An ongoing challenge for clinical ethics consultation is learning how colleagues in other healthcare professions understand, make use of, and evaluate clinical ethics consultation services. Aim: In pursuing such knowledge as part of clinical ethics consultation service quality assessment, clinical ethics consultation services can learn important information about the issues and concerns that prompt colleagues to request ethics consultation. Such knowledge allows for greater outreach, education, and responsiveness by clinical ethics consultation services to the concerns of clinician colleagues. Design: This quality assessment project explores consultation requests and follow-up questionnaire responses voluntarily submitted from nurses who requested clinical ethics consultation. We present qualitative data analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison methods to identify key concerns that prompted requests as well as common themes among nurse requestors’ evaluations of what was most important in clinical ethics consultations. Participants and context: A total of 41 nurses requesting clinical ethics consultation and 15 who returned the follow-up questionnaire. Ethical considerations: Our Office of Research Compliance and Quality Improvement determined that our project was not considered human subjects research and so did not require institutional review board approval or exemption. However, efforts were made to avoid any sense of coercion and all data were de-identified prior to analysis. Findings: Our analysis revealed six main categories of issues that prompted nurses’ requests for ethics consultation, as well as unifying themes around nurses’ experiences, advocacy, and family support while caring for patients in the intersections of patients, families, and physicians. Discussion: The insights gained from analyzing nurses’ requests for and responses to clinical ethics consultation may serve as a resource for clinical ethics consultation services seeking to identify, respond to, and educate regarding issues of importance to nurse colleagues and may be a resource for nursing administrators and leadership seeking to identify and address common ethical issues nurses face. Conclusion: Ongoing work on clinical ethics consultation service quality improvement and engagement with our nursing colleagues about their concerns prompting—and their evaluations of—clinical ethics consultation are necessary.

Response to “Paradigms for Clinical Ethics Consultation Practice” by Mark D. Fox, Glenn McGee, and Arthur L. Caplan (CQ Vol 7, No 3)

1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-357
Author(s):  
Edward Rudin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation

Fox, McGee, and Caplan's “Paradigms for Clinical Ethics Consultation Practice”, in the Summer 1998 issue of CQ, evoked memories and an image.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document