Development and validation of the ethical challenges in clinical situations-questionnaire (ECCS-Q) by involving health-care providers from a tertiary care health setting

Author:

Gupta Snehil1ORCID,Singh Swarndeep2,Sarkar Siddharth3ORCID,Batra Atul4

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhopal, India

2. Department of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi, India

3. National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre and Department of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

4. Department of Medical Oncology, Institute of Rotary Cancer Hospital (IRCH), All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi, India

Abstract

Background and rationale Clinicians often encounter a variety of ethical challenges in their routine clinical practice, and it varies across healthcare and cultural settings of their practice. Despite of this, there are no clear-cut available guidelines concerning the right course of action in a given ethically challenging situation. A validated instrument that could capture the health care providers’ (HCP’s) viewpoints in this regard is lacking from Indian settings. Thus, the current study aimed at developing an instrument to assess the HCP’s perspective regarding different ethically challenging situations encountered in the Indian settings. Methods The questionnaire was developed by involving 15 medical experts. A mixed-method approach, Delphi-technique, and online survey were used for item generation and validation. Results The questionnaire comprised of 11 items (accounts 57% variance; having an α = 0.68) representing four factors: health-resource constraints, medical responsibility of the HCP, obtaining patients/family members’ consent for the treatment, and treatment beyond the standard protocol. The gender and clinical disciplines of the participants were related to their level of endorsement for various domains of the ECCS-Q. Conclusions Ethical challenges in the clinical practice fall in different clusters. The clinicians’ course of action in such situations have many socio-demographic and professional determinants. Future studies are warranted to investigate these phenomena.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Philosophy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Medicine (miscellaneous)

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