RESUMO

Las pandemias y otras catástrofes de alto impacto sanitario azotan periódicamente a la humanidad, aumentando desproporcionadamente la demanda por atención en servicios de urgencia, unidades de cuidados intensivos y medios de soporte vital avanzado. Este desequilibrio obliga a una compleja toma de decisiones en que se deben asignar recursos proporcionalmente escasos en relación a una gran demanda. Así, los equipos clínicos asistenciales necesitan actuar bajo criterios consensuados, que orienten sus decisiones y alivien la pesada carga moral de seleccionar pacientes para terapias, en detrimento de otros. El triaje es una estrategia que permite establecer, bajo racionalidades propias a cada escenario, objetivos y criterios que faciliten la toma de decisiones complejas para el logro del mejor resultado. Estas estrategias deben considerar el marco de valores intangibles que apreciamos y que nos identifican cultural y socialmente, como son el respeto a la vida, la igualdad, la justicia y la libertad. Sin embargo, en escenarios excepcionales como el de la actual pandemia COVID-19, en que el sistema sanitario puede no dar abasto, deberán establecerse objetivos prioritarios, como salvar la mayor cantidad de vidas, del modo más humano, justo y eficiente posible. A la vez, deberán redefinirse jerarquías en los valores y principios clásicos de la práctica clínica cotidiana, adecuadas a la catástrofe sanitaria, bajo una ética propia de la salud pública, el mayor bien para la mayoría y el mejor cuidado de los que no pueden ser curados.

Pandemics and other global disasters regularly overwhelm humankind. These catastrophic events suddenly increase demand for health-care in emergency services, intensive care units, and for advanced life support devices. This imbalance requires complex decision-making in which scarce resources must be allocated in relation to high demand. Thus, health-care teams need to act under consensus criteria that guide their decisions and alleviate the heavy moral burden of selecting patients for therapies, excluding others. Triage is a strategy that allows to establish, under appropriate rationalities, objectives and criteria that facilitate complex decisions to achieve the best results. These strategies should consider the framework of intangible values that we appreciate and identify us culturally and socially, such as respect for life, equity, justice and freedom. However, in exceptional scenarios such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, where the health system may be overcome, priority goals should focus in order to save as many lives as possible and by mean the most humane, fair and efficient way possible. At the same time, hierarchies of classical values and principles of daily clinical practice should be redefined in an appropriate way to face this catastrophic scenario, under an ethics for public health, the greatest good for the most and the best care of those who cannot be cured.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is a pandemic that produces a large number of simultaneous patients with severe symptoms and in need of special hospital care, overloading the infrastructure of health services. All of these demands generate the need to ration equipment and interventions. Faced with this imbalance, how, when, and who decides, there is the impact of the stressful systems of professionals who are at the front line of care and, in the background, issues inherent to human subjectivity. Along this path, the idea of using artificial intelligence algorithms to replace health professionals in the decision-making process also arises. In this context, there is the ethical question of how to manage the demands produced by the pandemic. The objective of this work is to reflect, from the point of view of medical ethics, on the basic principles of the choices made by the health teams, during the COVID-19 pandemic, whose resources are scarce and decisions cause anguish and restlessness. The ethical values for the rationing of health resources in an epidemic must converge to some proposals based on fundamental values such as maximizing the benefits produced by scarce resources, treating people equally, promoting and recommending instrumental values, giving priority to critical situations. Naturally, different judgments will occur in different circumstances, but transparency is essential to ensure public trust. In this way, it is possible to develop prioritization guidelines using well-defined values and ethical recommendations to achieve fair resource allocation.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The catastrophic emergency experienced by many countries with the COVID-19 pandemic emphasized the importance of bioethics for decision-making, both at the public health (equitable and effective policies) and at the clinical level. At the clinical level, the issues are the fulfillment of medical care demand with adequate health care teams, infrastructure, and supplies, and to cover critical care demands that surpass the available resources. Therefore, ethically correct approaches are required for the allocation of life sustaining resources. There are recommendations for the allocating life support during disasters based on multiple considerations, including ethical ones. However, the ethical criteria of existing guidelines are variable. Ethical principles usually considered are saving the greatest number of lives, saving the greatest number of years of life and the principle of the life cycle or the goal to give each individual equal opportunity to live through the various phases of life. However, the centrality of the human being and the search for the common good should be considered. Knowledge of public perspectives and moral benchmarks on these issues is essential. A successful assignment effort will require everyone's trust and cooperation. Decision making should be planned and discussed in advance, since in-depth deliberation will be extremely complex during the disaster. Our goal is to help the health care teams to wisely allocate resources in shortage periods.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The current COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to overwhelm the capacity of hospitals and Intensive Care Units in Chile and Latin America. Thus local authorities have an ethical obligation to be prepared by implementing pertinent measures to prevent a situation of rationing of scarce healthcare resources, and by defining ethically acceptable and socially legitimate criteria for the allocation of these resources. This paper responds to recent ethical guidelines issued by a Chilean academic institution and discusses the main moral principles for the ethical foundations of criteria for rationing during the present crisis. It argues that under exceptional circumstances such as the current pandemic, the traditional patient-centered morality of medicine needs to be balanced with ethical principles formulated from a public health perspective, including the principles of social utility, social justice and equity, among others. The paper concludes with some recommendations regarding how to reach an agreement about rationing criteria and about their implementation in clinical practice.

La actual pandemia por COVID-19 tiene el potencial de sobrepasar la capacidad de hospitales y unidades de cuidados intensivos en Chile y América Latina. Por lo tanto, las autoridades locales tienen la obligación ética de estar preparadas mediante la implementación de medidas tendientes a evitar una situación de racionamiento de recursos sanitarios escasos, y a través de la definición de criterios éticamente aceptables y socialmente legítimos para la asignación de estos recursos. Este artículo presenta una respuesta a orientaciones éticas recientes emitidas por una institución académica chilena y analiza los principios éticos relevantes para la fundamentación ética de criterios de racionamiento. Se argumenta que, frente a circunstancias excepcionales como la actual pandemia, la moral centrada en el paciente de la medicina tradicional necesita ser ponderada con principios éticos formulados desde una perspectiva de salud pública, incluyendo los principios de utilidad social, justicia social y equidad, entre otros. Se concluye con algunas recomendaciones sobre cómo llegar a acuerdo sobre criterios de racionamiento y sobre la implementación de estos en la práctica clínica.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The catastrophic emergency experienced by many countries with the COVID-19 pandemic emphasized the importance of bioethics for decision-making, both at the public health (equitable and effective policies) and at the clinical level. At the clinical level, the issues are the fulfillment of medical care demand with adequate health care teams, infrastructure, and supplies, and to cover critical care demands that surpass the available resources. Therefore, ethically correct approaches are required for the allocation of life sustaining resources. There are recommendations for the allocating life support during disasters based on multiple considerations, including ethical ones. However, the ethical criteria of existing guidelines are variable. Ethical principles usually considered are saving the greatest number of lives, saving the greatest number of years of life and the principle of the life cycle or the goal to give each individual equal opportunity to live through the various phases of life. However, the centrality of the human being and the search for the common good should be considered. Knowledge of public perspectives and moral benchmarks on these issues is essential. A successful assignment effort will require everyone's trust and cooperation. Decision making should be planned and discussed in advance, since in-depth deliberation will be extremely complex during the disaster. Our goal is to help the health care teams to wisely allocate resources in shortage periods.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. METHODS: A web search was performed using the terms "bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies." RESULTS: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19 deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. CONCLUSION: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assuntos

RESUMO

La actual pandemia por COVID-19 tiene el potencial de sobrepasar la capacidad de hospitales y unidades de cuidados intensivos en Chile y América Latina. Por lo tanto, las autoridades locales tienen la obligación ética de estar preparadas mediante la implementación de medidas tendientes a evitar una situación de racionamiento de recursos sanitarios escasos, y a través de la definición de criterios éticamente aceptables y socialmente legítimos para la asignación de estos recursos. Este artículo presenta una respuesta a orientaciones éticas recientes emitidas por una institución académica chilena y analiza los principios éticos relevantes para la fundamentación ética de criterios de racionamiento. Se argumenta que, frente a circunstancias excepcionales como la actual pandemia, la moral centrada en el paciente de la medicina tradicional necesita ser ponderada con principios éticos formulados desde una perspectiva de salud pública, incluyendo los principios de utilidad social, justicia social y equidad, entre otros. Se concluye con algunas recomendaciones sobre cómo llegar a acuerdo sobre criterios de racionamiento y sobre la implementación de estos en la práctica clínica.

The current COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to overwhelm the capacity of hospitals and Intensive Care Units in Chile and Latin America. Thus local authorities have an ethical obligation to be prepared by implementing pertinent measures to prevent a situation of rationing of scarce healthcare resources, and by defining ethically acceptable and socially legitimate criteria for the allocation of these resources. This paper responds to recent ethical guidelines issued by a Chilean academic institution and discusses the main moral principles for the ethical foundations of criteria for rationing during the present crisis. It argues that under exceptional circumstances such as the current pandemic, the traditional patient-centered morality of medicine needs to be balanced with ethical principles formulated from a public health perspective, including the principles of social utility, social justice and equity, among others. The paper concludes with some recommendations regarding how to reach an agreement about rationing criteria and about their implementation in clinical practice.

Assuntos

RESUMO

SUMMARY The respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is a pandemic that produces a large number of simultaneous patients with severe symptoms and in need of special hospital care, overloading the infrastructure of health services. All of these demands generate the need to ration equipment and interventions. Faced with this imbalance, how, when, and who decides, there is the impact of the stressful systems of professionals who are at the front line of care and, in the background, issues inherent to human subjectivity. Along this path, the idea of using artificial intelligence algorithms to replace health professionals in the decision-making process also arises. In this context, there is the ethical question of how to manage the demands produced by the pandemic. The objective of this work is to reflect, from the point of view of medical ethics, on the basic principles of the choices made by the health teams, during the COVID-19 pandemic, whose resources are scarce and decisions cause anguish and restlessness. The ethical values for the rationing of health resources in an epidemic must converge to some proposals based on fundamental values such as maximizing the benefits produced by scarce resources, treating people equally, promoting and recommending instrumental values, giving priority to critical situations. Naturally, different judgments will occur in different circumstances, but transparency is essential to ensure public trust. In this way, it is possible to develop prioritization guidelines using well-defined values and ethical recommendations to achieve fair resource allocation.

RESUMO A doença respiratória provocada pelo coronavírus 2019 (COVID-19) é uma pandemia que produz uma grande quantidade simultânea de doentes com sintomas graves que necessitam de cuidados hospitalares especiais, sobrecarregando a infraestrutura dos serviços de saúde. Todas essas demandas geram a necessidade de racionar equipamentos e intervenções. Diante desse desequilíbrio, como, quando e quem decide, há o impacto dos sistemas estressores dos profissionais que se encontram na linha de frente do atendimento e, em segundo plano, questões inerentes à subjetividade humana. Nesse percurso, surge ainda a ideia do uso de algoritmos da inteligência artificial para substituir o profissional de saúde nessa tomada de decisão. Nesse contexto, fica o questionamento ético de como gerenciar as demandas produzidas pela pandemia. O objetivo deste trabalho é refletir, do ponto de vista da ética médica, sobre princípios basilares das escolhas executadas pelas equipes de saúde, no enfrentamento da pandemia da COVID-19, cujos recursos são escassos e as decisões ocasionam angústia e inquietação. Os valores éticos para o racionamento de recursos de saúde em uma epidemia devem convergir para algumas propostas embasadas em valores fundamentais, como maximizar os benefícios produzidos por recursos escassos, tratar as pessoas de forma igualitária, promover e recomendar os valores instrumentais, dar prioridade para situações críticas. Naturalmente ocorrerão julgamentos diferentes em circunstâncias distintas, mas é fundamental que haja transparência para garantir a confiança pública. Desse modo, é possível elaborar diretrizes de priorização utilizando valores e recomendações éticas bem delineados para atingir procedimentos justos de alocação de recursos.

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

This paper starts by establishing a prima facie case that disadvantaged groups or individuals are more likely to get a chronic disease and are in a disadvantaged position to adhere to chronic treatment despite access through Universal Health Coverage. However, the main aim of this paper is to explore the normative implications of this claim by examining two different but intertwined argumentative lines that might contribute to a better understanding of the ethical challenges faced by chronic disease health policy. The paper develops the argument that certain disadvantages which may predispose to illness might overlap with disadvantages that may hinder self-management, potentially becoming disadvantageous in handling chronic disease. If so, chronic diseases may be seen as disadvantages in themselves, describing a reproduction of disadvantage among the chronically ill and a vicious circle of disadvantage that could both predict and shed light on the catastrophic health outcomes among disadvantaged groups-or individuals-dealing with chronic disease.

Assuntos