Clinical ethics consultations in psychiatric compared to non-psychiatric medical settings: characteristics and outcomes. 2019

T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
Department of Clinical Ethics, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Kantensiek 19, 33617 Bielefeld, Germany.

BACKGROUND In the recent years clinical ethics consultations (CEC) received an increasing attention not only in patients with medical conditions but also in those with mental disorders. However, the systematic and empirical knowledge is still small. The aim of this observational study was to investigate whether CECs differ between psychiatric and medical hospital inpatients regarding ethical issues, goals, characteristics, processes, and outcomes. METHODS This is a retrospective and in parts prospective analysis of a semi-structured CEC approach provided by the CEC service at a large German general hospital between January 2006 and June 2015. RESULTS A total of 259 CECs in three inpatient settings were investigated, i.e. intensive care units (ICU, 43.6%), low care units (LCU, 33.6%), and psychiatric care units (PCU, 22.8%). In all groups, most ethical issues addressed treatment intensity (80.6%) and resulted in over 93% in participants' agreement on final ethical recommendations as well as in high implementation rates (>89%). However, we found significant group differences: In PCUs patients participated more often in the CEC (p < .001), the number of all participants was higher (p < .001), CECs were more time expensive (p < .001), and more recommendations focused on interventions against the patients' declared intention (37.7% versus 0%) than in the other groups. CONCLUSIONS In spite of different clinical characteristics and ethical issues between patients and settings, consensus and implementation of the CEC recommendation could be achieved at a high rate in all groups. There are substantial differences regarding goals, participation of patients, and processes. It is worth considering adapting the CEC to the special needs in psychiatric settings, especially under the aspect of the patients' perspective and involvement.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries

Related Publications

T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
January 2013, Psychosomatics,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
January 2000, General hospital psychiatry,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
January 1996, SBC : newsletter of the Society for Bioethics Consultation,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
December 2018, HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
January 1996, Journal of the South Carolina Medical Association (1975),
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
October 2015, Journal of intensive care medicine,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
March 1966, The Journal of nervous and mental disease,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
September 2022, BMC medical ethics,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
March 2021, Asian journal of psychiatry,
T Löbbing, and S Carvalho Fernando, and M Driessen, and M Schulz, and J Behrens, and K K B Kobert
September 2001, Journal of psychosocial nursing and mental health services,
Copied contents to your clipboard!