Impact of Ethics and Economics on End-of-Life Decisions in an Indian Neonatal Unit

Author:

Miljeteig Ingrid1,Sayeed Sadath Ali2,Jesani Amar3,Johansson Kjell Arne1,Norheim Ole Frithjof1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Medical Ethics, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care and Global Health: Ethics, Economics and Culture, Centre for International Health, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

2. Division of Medical Ethics, Harvard Medical School, Program in Ethics and Health, Harvard University, Division of Newborn Medicine, Children's Hospital Boston, Boston, Massachusetts

3. Centre for Studies in Ethics and Rights, an Institute of Anusandhan Trust, Mumbai, India

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to describe how providers in an Indian NICU reach life-or-death treatment decisions. METHODS: Qualitative in-depth interviews, field observations, and document analysis were conducted at an Indian nonprofit private tertiary institution that provided advanced neonatal care under conditions of resource scarcity. RESULTS: Compared with American and European units with similar technical capabilities, the unit studied maintained a much higher threshold for treatment initiation and continuation (range: 28–32 completed gestational weeks). We observed that complex, interrelated socioeconomic reasons influenced specific treatment decisions. Providers desired to protect families and avoid a broad range of perceived harms: they were reluctant to risk outcomes with chronic disability; they openly factored scarcity of institutional resources; they were sensitive to local, culturally entrenched intrafamilial dynamics; they placed higher regard for “precious” infants; and they felt relatively powerless to prevent gender discrimination. Formal or regulatory guidelines were either lacking or not controlling. CONCLUSIONS: In a tertiary-level academic Indian NICU, multiple factors external to predicted clinical survival of a preterm newborn influence treatment decisions. Providers adjust their decisions about withdrawing or withholding treatment on the basis of pragmatic considerations. Numerous issues related to resource scarcity are relevant, and providers prioritize outcomes that affect stakeholders other than the newborn. These findings may have implications for initiatives that seek to improve global neonatal health.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Reference32 articles.

1. Save the Children/US NNF. State of India's Newborns. National Neonatal Forum and Save the Children, US, New Delhi: Washington, DC; 2004

2. United Nations Children's Fund. State of Asia-Pacific's Children 2008. Available at: www.unicef.org/publications/files/SOAPC_2008_080408.pdf. Accessed June 25, 2008

3. Knippenberg R, Lawn JE, Darmstadt GL, et al. Systematic scaling up of neonatal care in countries. Lancet. 2005;365(9464):1087–1098

4. World Health Organization. Managing newborn problems: a guide for doctors, nurses and midwives. In: Integrated Management of Pregnancy and Childbirth. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2003

5. Darmstadt GL, Bhutta ZA, Cousens S, Adam T, Walker N, de Bernis L. Evidence-based, cost-effective interventions: how many newborn babies can we save?Lancet. 2005;365(9463):977–988

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3