scholarly journals Az igazságosság és a besorolás etikai problémái az egészségügyben, különös tekintettel a COVID–19-járvány olaszországi tapasztalataira

2020 ◽  
Vol 161 (45) ◽  
pp. 1899-1907
Author(s):  
Orsolya Márta Péter
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Scarce Resources ◽  
Probability Of Survival ◽  
Sensitive Issue ◽  
Life Saving ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
Utilitarian Approach

Összefoglaló. A 2020. év elején kirobbant COVID–19-világjárvány többek között ráirányította a figyelmet az életmentő-életfenntartó kezelések igazságos elosztásának érzékeny kérdésére is. Európán belül elsőként Olaszországot sújtotta a katasztrófa, a válsághelyzetben pedig az érzéstelenítés, fájdalomcsillapítás, újraélesztés és intenzív ellátás területén tevékenykedő szakemberek olasz társasága, a SIAARTI 2020. március 6-án közzétett egy 15 pontos ajánlást. E szerint utilitarista megközelítéssel a rendelkezésre álló szűkös erőforrásokat azon betegek kezelésére kellene fordítani, akik túlélési esélye nagyobb, valamint több életévre számíthatnak a jövőben, mert ez biztosíthatja a lehető legtöbb ember számára a lehető legnagyobb hasznot. A javaslat komoly szakmai vitát robbantott ki, amely egyértelművé tette, hogy az orvosi eszközök igazságos elosztására vonatkozó diskurzust feltétlenül folytatni kell, nemcsak Olaszországon belül, hanem a pandémiától sújtott többi államban is. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(45): 1899–1907. Summary. Among other queries, the explosion of the COVID-19 pandemic at the beginning of 2020 has firmly put in focus the sensitive issue of how to allocate scarcely available life-saving treatments in a fair and just manner. The first European country to face an emergency caused by the pandemic was Italy. In a rapidly escalating crisis, on 6th March 2020, the Italian Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) issued a series of 15 recommendations, suggesting that a utilitarian approach should be adopted in Italian health care and the extremely scarce resources should be reserved for patients with a greater probability of survival and life expectancy, in order to maximize the benefits for the largest possible number of people. The recommendations generated a heated debate among health care professionals, thereby evidencing that similar discussions must be initiated and pursued in all countries affected by the pandemic. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(45): 1899–1907.

scholarly journals The experiences of health care professionals, patients, and families of the process of referral and admission to intensive care: A systematic literature review

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Rees ◽  
Frances Griffiths ◽  
Christopher Bassford ◽  
Mike Brooke ◽  
Zoe Fritz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Life Saving ◽  
Professional Environment

Treatment in an intensive care unit can be life-saving but it can be distressing and not every patient can benefit. Decisions to admit a patient to an intensive care unit are complex. We wished to explore how the decision to refer or admit is experienced by those involved, and undertook a systematic review of the literature to answer the research question: What are the experiences of health care professionals, patients, and families, of the process of referral and admission to an intensive care unit? Twelve relevant studies were identified, and a thematic analysis was conducted. Most studies involved health care professionals, with only two considering patients' or families' experiences. Four themes were identified which influenced experiences of intensive care unit referral and review: the professional environment; communication; the allocation of limited resources; and acknowledging uncertainty. Patients' and families' experiences have been under-researched in this area.

scholarly journals Bedside Nurse Acceptance of Intensive Care Unit Telemedicine Presence

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. e1-e4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Canfield ◽  
Sandra Galvin
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Health Care Organizations ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Health Care Delivery System ◽  
Perception Of Support ◽  
Evidence Based Care

Since 2010, health care organizations have rapidly adopted telemedicine as part of their health care delivery system to inpatients and outpatients. The application of telemedicine in the intensive care unit is often referred to as tele-ICU. In telemedicine, nurses, nurse practitioners, physicians, and other health care professionals provide patient monitoring and intervention from a remote location. Tele-ICU presence has demonstrated positive outcomes such as increased adherence to evidence-based care and improved perception of support at the bedside. Despite the successes, acceptance of tele-ICU varies. Known barriers to acceptance include perceptions of intrusiveness and invasion of privacy.

scholarly journals Smart Glasses for Caring Situations in Complex Care Environments: Scoping Review

10.2196/16055 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e16055
Author(s):  
Charlotte Romare ◽  
Lisa Skär
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Anesthesia Care ◽  
Complex Care ◽  
Smart Glasses

Background Anesthesia departments and intensive care units represent two advanced, high-tech, and complex care environments. Health care in those environments involves different types of technology to provide safe, high-quality care. Smart glasses have previously been used in different health care settings and have been suggested to assist health care professionals in numerous areas. However, smart glasses in the complex contexts of anesthesia care and intensive care are new and innovative. An overview of existing research related to these contexts is needed before implementing smart glasses into complex care environments. Objective The aim of this study was to highlight potential benefits and limitations with health care professionals' use of smart glasses in situations occurring in complex care environments. Methods A scoping review with six steps was conducted to fulfill the objective. Database searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus; original articles about health care professionals’ use of smart glasses in complex care environments and/or situations occurring in those environments were included. The searches yielded a total of 20 articles that were included in the review. Results Three categories were created during the qualitative content analysis: (1) smart glasses as a versatile tool that offers opportunities and challenges, (2) smart glasses entail positive and negative impacts on health care professionals, and (3) smart glasses' quality of use provides facilities and leaves room for improvement. Smart glasses were found to be both a helpful tool and a hindrance in caring situations that might occur in complex care environments. This review provides an increased understanding about different situations where smart glasses might be used by health care professionals in clinical practice in anesthesia care and intensive care; however, research about smart glasses in clinical complex care environments is limited. Conclusions Thoughtful implementation and improved hardware are needed to meet health care professionals’ needs. New technology brings challenges; more research is required to elucidate how smart glasses affect patient safety, health care professionals, and quality of care in complex care environments.

scholarly journals Health care professionals' attitudes towards deprescribing in older patients with limited life expectancy: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. 868-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carina Lundby ◽  
Trine Graabæk ◽  
Jesper Ryg ◽  
Jens Søndergaard ◽  
Anton Pottegård ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Limited Life Expectancy ◽  
Limited Life

scholarly journals Collateral damages in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemia– two cases

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Urbanek ◽  
Jana Kötteritzsch ◽  
Wolfgang Zink ◽  
Armin J. Grau
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Brain Edema ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Delayed Diagnosis ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Prolonged Treatment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Background and aims At present, “severe acute respiratory syndrome new coronavirus” (SARS-CoV-2) affects the whole world and has led to a pandemia with almost 2.000.000 infected patients in the mid of April 2020 (WHO). Thus, health care specialists primarily focus on therapy of corona disease 2019 (COVID-19) and a lot of effort has been undertaken to get more manpower on intensive care units. However, the number of patients with life threatening diseases other than COVID-19 like heart attacks or strokes has not changed at all. With a strong focus on COVID-19, there is a marked risk of diagnostic and therapeutic delays or misdiagnoses, potentially harming those patients. In this respect, we present two of those cases with the intent to improve the medical management of “traditional“ diseases in times of corona pandemia. Methods We present two patients with diseases others than SARS-CoV-2. Both cases were treated in our institution, a tertiary care hospital in the Southwest of Germany. Results One patient had a prolonged treatment on intensive care unit (ICU) because of heart failure following voluntary isolation because of fearing COVID-19 and subsequent shortage of medication. Another patient with hypothesis of COVID-19 of primary care physician because of fever and a history of skiing in a high risk region for SARS-CoV-2 was sent home for isolation. After disease progression, the patient presented in an external hospital with fever, pain in the right ear and tachypnea. Immediately, antibiotics were started at same day, but nevertheless, he developed a septic shock, leading to multi organ failure. In blood samples, bacteria Streptococcus pyogenes was found, without any signs of SARS-CoV-2-infection. Despite adequate antibiosis, the patient developed fixed pupils, brain edema and died because of massive brain edema. Conclusion Focusing only on COVID-19 may lead to delayed diagnosis and therapy in patients with “traditional diseases”. These two cases impressively clarify medical challenges in times of SARS-CoV-2 pandemia. It is important to emphasize that physicians and health care professionals have not only to focus on COVID-19 and virus associated diseases, but also on adequate drug supply, intake and monitoring and differential diagnoses, respectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document