B Ogando Díaz1, C García Pérez. 1. Médico de familia, Magíster universitario en bioética, UCM, Centro de Salud Cuzco, Fuenlabrada, Area IX, IMSALUD, Madrid, España. beatriz@ogando.net
Abstract
MAIN OBJECTIVE: to understand the significance and sense of bioethics for social work/health professionals; the secondary objective is to quantify the bioethics training given in IMSALUD primary care. DESIGN: Interviews with key reporters. Face-to-face interviews with people in charge of the training and research departments. SETTING: The 11 primary health care areas of IMSALUD. PARTICIPANTS AND/OR CONTEXTS: Key reporters (1 for each health area) chosen by heads of teaching: people working in the area with a specific weight or personal interest in bioethics. METHOD: 11 key reporters (1 for each health area); telephone contact and mailing of open-question questionnaire. RESULTS: Bioethics is implicit in daily activity, but unconsciously. General rejection due to its themes, which involve self-criticism. Ethical conflicts basically arising from the relationship of health workers with patients and the family, especially concerning information-giving, were pointed to. Themes considered very important were informed consent and confidentiality. Other ethical problems were allocation and distribution of limited resources, responsibility for taking up situations that worsen health care (lists too long, burnt-out companions, malpractice...). More training, both practical and theoretical, and more time to perform tasks were called for. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy to improve health professionals' ethical approach is to increase their Bioethics training. Very little bioethics training is provided for social work/health professionals by primary care management in the Community of Madrid.
MAIN OBJECTIVE: to understand the significance and sense of bioethics for social work/health professionals; the secondary objective is to quantify the bioethics training given in IMSALUD primary care. DESIGN: Interviews with key reporters. Face-to-face interviews with people in charge of the training and research departments. SETTING: The 11 primary health care areas of IMSALUD. PARTICIPANTS AND/OR CONTEXTS: Key reporters (1 for each health area) chosen by heads of teaching: people working in the area with a specific weight or personal interest in bioethics. METHOD: 11 key reporters (1 for each health area); telephone contact and mailing of open-question questionnaire. RESULTS: Bioethics is implicit in daily activity, but unconsciously. General rejection due to its themes, which involve self-criticism. Ethical conflicts basically arising from the relationship of health workers with patients and the family, especially concerning information-giving, were pointed to. Themes considered very important were informed consent and confidentiality. Other ethical problems were allocation and distribution of limited resources, responsibility for taking up situations that worsen health care (lists too long, burnt-out companions, malpractice...). More training, both practical and theoretical, and more time to perform tasks were called for. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy to improve health professionals' ethical approach is to increase their Bioethics training. Very little bioethics training is provided for social work/health professionals by primary care management in the Community of Madrid.
Authors: R Altisent Trota; M T Delgado Marroquín; L Jolín Garijo; M N Martín Espíldora; R Ruiz Moral; P Simón Lorda; J R Vázquez Díaz Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2000-04-30 Impact factor: 1.137