Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (6)
Document Type
- Article (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (6) (remove)
Keywords
- Organisationsethik (2)
- Organizational ethics (2)
- Case (1)
- Clinical ethics (1)
- Clinical ethics committees (1)
- Clinical ethics consultation (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Ethics committee (1)
- Ethikberatung (1)
- Ethikkomitee (1)
Ethik-Komitees gehören zum festen Bestandteil des Ethikmanagements und der Organisationsethik in klinischen Einrichtungen des Gesundheitswesens. Entsprechende Ethikstrukturen und die damit verbundenen Angebote stoßen hinsichtlich ihrer Wirksamkeit allerdings an ihre Grenzen. Ihre Arbeitsweisen sind häufig reaktiv und eine Verankerung in den entsprechenden Organisationsebenen fehlt. Ausgehend von diesen Limitationen der klinischen Ethikberatung hat sich die multiprofessionelle „Arbeitsgruppe Ethik“ am Universitätsklinikum Tübingen (UKT) um die Konzeption und Implementierung eines neuen Ansatzes zur nachhaltigen Integration von ethischen Reflexions- und Entscheidungsprozessen auf den Stationen des UKT bemüht. Mit dem Tübinger Modell der Ethikbeauftragten der Station verfolgt sie ein Pilotprojekt, das speziell geschulte Pflegekräfte aus allen Stationen des UKT als AnsprechpartnerInnen für ethische Fragen einsetzt. Damit stellen die Ethikbeauftragten eine Erweiterung zu etablierten Strukturen der Ethikberatung dar und ergänzen vorhandene Top-Down-Strategien. Der vorliegende Beitrag stellt die Zielsetzungen des Tübinger Modells dar und schildert erste Erfahrungen in der Umsetzung. Neben der Einbettung in organisationale Strukturen der Ethikberatung werden die stationsinternen und stationsübergreifenden Aufgaben der Ethikbeauftragten dargestellt. Zudem wird das Qualifikationsprogramm für Ethikbeauftragte (Basis- und Aufbauschulung) sowie ein Train-the-Trainer-Konzept vorgestellt, welche eine vertiefende Entwicklung von pflege- und medizinethischer Kompetenzen unterstützen und Sicherheit in den stationsbezogenen Reflexions- und Entscheidungsprozessen vermitteln.
Ethical, legal, and social implications of symptom checker Apps in primary Health Care (CHECK.APP)
(2022)
Background:
Symptom checker apps (SCAs) are accessible tools that provide early symptom assessment for users. The ethical, legal, and social implications of SCAs and their impact on the patient-physician relationship, the health care providers, and the health care system have sparsely been examined. This study protocol describes an approach to investigate the possible impacts and implications of SCAs on different levels of health care provision. It considers the perspectives of the users, nonusers, general practitioners (GPs), and health care experts.
Objective:
We aim to assess a comprehensive overview of the use of SCAs and address problematic issues, if any. The primary outcomes of this study are empirically informed multi-perspective recommendations for different stakeholders on the ethical, legal, and social implications of SCAs.
Methods:
Quantitative and qualitative methods will be used in several overlapping and interconnected study phases. In study phase 1, a comprehensive literature review will be conducted to assess the ethical, legal, social, and systemic impacts of SCAs. Study phase 2 comprises a survey that will be analyzed with a logistic regression. It aims to assess the user degree of SCAs in Germany as well as the predictors for SCA usage. Study phase 3 will investigate self-observational diaries and user interviews, which will be analyzed as integrated cases to assess user perspectives, usage pattern, and arising problems. Study phase 4 will comprise GP interviews to assess their experiences, perspectives, self-image, and concepts and will be analyzed with the basic procedure by Kruse. Moreover, interviews with health care experts will be conducted in study phase 3 and will be analyzed by using the reflexive thematical analysis approach of Braun and Clark.
Results:
Study phase 1 will be completed in November 2021. We expect the results of study phase 2 in December 2021 and February 2022. In study phase 3, interviews are currently being conducted. The final study endpoint will be in February 2023.
Conclusions:
The possible ethical, legal, social, and systemic impacts of a widespread use of SCAs that affect stakeholders and stakeholder groups on different levels of health care will be identified. The proposed methodological approach provides a multifaceted and diverse empirical basis for a broad discussion on these implications.
Genetic engineering has provided humans the ability to transform organisms by direct manipulation of genomes within a broad range of applications including agriculture (e.g., GM crops), and the pharmaceutical industry (e.g., insulin production). Developments within the last 10 years have produced new tools for genome editing (e.g., CRISPR/Cas9) that can achieve much greater precision than previous forms of genetic engineering. Moreover, these tools could offer the potential for interventions on humans and for both clinical and non-clinical purposes, resulting in a broad scope of applicability. However, their promising abilities and potential uses (including their applicability in humans for either somatic or heritable genome editing interventions) greatly increase their potential societal impacts and, as such, have brought an urgency to ethical and regulatory discussions about the application of such technology in our society. In this article, we explore different arguments (pragmatic, sociopolitical and categorical) that have been made in support of or in opposition to the new technologies of genome editing and their impact on the debate of the permissibility or otherwise of human heritable genome editing interventions in the future. For this purpose, reference is made to discussions on genetic engineering that have taken place in the field of bioethics since the 1980s. Our analysis shows that the dominance of categorical arguments has been reversed in favour of pragmatic arguments such as safety concerns. However, when it comes to involving the public in ethical discourse, we consider it crucial widening the debate beyond such pragmatic considerations. In this article, we explore some of the key categorical as well sociopolitical considerations raised by the potential uses of heritable genome editing interventions, as these considerations underline many of the societal concerns and values crucial for public engagement. We also highlight how pragmatic considerations, despite their increasing importance in the work of recent authoritative sources, are unlikely to be the result of progress on outstanding categorical issues, but rather reflect the limited progress on these aspects and/or pressures in regulating the use of the technology.
Jenseits der Klinik
(2021)
Unser Beitrag stellt ein interaktives Ethik-Konzept vor, das in Zusammenarbeit der BruderhausDiakonie Reutlingen und der Universität Tübingen entwickelt wurde, um den Eigenheiten und Bedarfen einer komplexen Organisationsstruktur gerecht zu werden, die mehrere Geschäftsfelder und Standorte unter sich vereint. Wir skizzieren die Grundzüge des interaktiven Nijmegener Modells, in dem die Kooperation eines auf Leitungsebene angesiedelten Komitees und situationsbezogener Fallbesprechungen ein fruchtbares Zusammenspiel zweier unverzichtbarer Reflexionsweisen bewirken soll („Top-Down“/„Bottom-Up“). Wir zeigen auf, welche Herausforderungen sich bei der Implementierung dieses Modells in die konkrete Aufbauorganisation der BruderhausDiakonie ergaben, und mit welchen konzeptionellen oder „implementationstechnischen“ Mitteln ihnen begegnet wurde. Im Zentrum steht dabei die Erweiterung des Nijmegener Modells um ein Verbindungselement, welches die Zusammenarbeit zwischen zentralem Ausschuss und dezentralen Fallbesprechungen koordiniert und das interaktive Moment des Modells erst ermöglicht.