34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Two years of ethics reflection groups about coercion in psychiatry. Measuring variation within employees’ normative attitudes, user involvement and the handling of disagreement

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Research on the impact of ethics reflection groups (ERG) (also called moral case deliberations (MCD)) is complex and scarce. Within a larger study, two years of ERG sessions have been used as an intervention to stimulate ethical reflection about the use of coercive measures. We studied changes in: employees’ attitudes regarding the use of coercion, team competence, user involvement, team cooperation and the handling of disagreement in teams.

          Methods

          We used panel data in a longitudinal design study to measure variation in survey scores from multidisciplinary employees from seven departments within three Norwegian mental health care institutions at three time points (T0–T1–T2). Mixed models were used to account for dependence of data in persons who participated more than once.

          Results

          In total, 1068 surveys (from 817 employees who did and did not participate in ERG) were included in the analyses. Of these, 7.6% (N = 62) responded at three points in time, 15.5% (N = 127) at two points, and 76.8% (N = 628) once. On average, over time, respondents who participated in ERG viewed coercion more strongly as offending ( p < 0.05). Those who presented a case in the ERG sessions showed lower scores on User Involvement ( p < 0.001), Team Cooperation ( p < 0.01) and Constructive Disagreement ( p < 0.01). We observed significant differences in outcomes between individuals from different departments, as well as between different professions. Initial significant changes due to frequency of participation in ERG and case presentation in ERG did not remain statistically significant after adjustment for Departments and Professions. Differences were generally small in absolute terms, possibly due to the low amount of longitudinal data.

          Conclusions

          This study measured specific intervention-related outcome parameters for describing the impact of clinical ethics support (CES). Structural implementation of ERGs or MCDs seems to contribute to employees reporting a more critical attitude towards coercion. Ethics support is a complex intervention and studying changes over time is complex in itself. Several recommendations for strengthening the outcomes of future CES evaluation studies are discussed. CES evaluation studies are important, since—despite the intrinsic value of participating in ERG or MCD—CES inherently aims, and should aim, at improving clinical practices.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-023-00909-w.

          Related collections

          Most cited references78

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Teaching ethics in the clinic. The theory and practice of moral case deliberation.

              A traditional approach to teaching medical ethics aims to provide knowledge about ethics. This is in line with an epistemological view on ethics in which moral expertise is assumed to be located in theoretical knowledge and not in the moral experience of healthcare professionals. The aim of this paper is to present an alternative, contextual approach to teaching ethics, which is grounded in a pragmatic-hermeneutical and dialogical ethics. This approach is called moral case deliberation. Within moral case deliberation, healthcare professionals bring in their actual moral questions during a structured dialogue. The ethicist facilitates the learning process by using various conversation methods in order to find answers to the case and to develop moral competencies. The case deliberations are not unique events, but are a structural part of the professional training on the work floor within healthcare institutions. This article presents the underlying theory on (teaching) ethics and illustrates this approach with an example of a moral case deliberation project in a Dutch psychiatric hospital. The project was evaluated using the method of responsive evaluation. This method provided us with rich information about the implementation process and effects the research process itself also lent support to the process of implementation.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bert.molewijk@medisin.uio.no
                reidar.pedersen@medisin.uio.no
                a.kok1@amsterdamumc.nl
                reidun.forde@medisin.uio.no
                olaf2306@gmail.com
                Journal
                BMC Med Ethics
                BMC Med Ethics
                BMC Medical Ethics
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6939
                12 May 2023
                12 May 2023
                2023
                : 24
                : 29
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.5510.1, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8921, Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, , University of Oslo, ; Oslo, Norway
                [2 ]GRID grid.12380.38, ISNI 0000 0004 1754 9227, Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, , Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, ; Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]GRID grid.12380.38, ISNI 0000 0004 1754 9227, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science and Department of Psychiatry, , Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, ; De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Aging and Later Life, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Article
                909
                10.1186/s12910-023-00909-w
                10182617
                37173770
                d439561c-f90f-46a9-9ef2-0a28716c0517
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 21 December 2020
                : 26 April 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: University of Oslo (incl Oslo University Hospital)
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Medicine
                ethics reflection groups,moral case deliberation,coercion,attitudes,clinical ethics support,user involvement,constructive disagreement,mental health care,outcomes evaluation,repeated cross-sectional survey

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log