BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has imposed challenges on healthcare systems and professionals worldwide and introduced a ´maelstrom´ of ethical dilemmas. How ethically demanding situations are handled affects employees' moral stress and job satisfaction. AIM: Describe priority-setting dilemmas, moral distress and support experienced by nurses and physicians across medical specialties in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Western Norway. RESEARCH DESIGN: A cross-sectional hospital-based survey was conducted from 23 April to 11 May 2020. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical approval granted by the Regional Research Ethics Committee in Western Norway (131421). FINDINGS: Among the 1606 respondents, 67% had experienced priority-setting dilemmas the previous two weeks. Healthcare workers who were directly involved in COVID-19 care, were redeployed or worked in psychiatry/addiction medicine experienced it more often. Although 59% of the respondents had seen adverse consequences due to resource scarcity, severe consequences were rare. Moral distress levels were generally low (2.9 on a 0-10 scale), but higher in selected groups (redeployed, managers and working in psychiatry/addiction medicine). Backing from existing collegial and managerial structures and routines, such as discussions with colleagues and receiving updates and information from managers that listened and acted upon feedback, were found more helpful than external support mechanisms. Priority-setting guidelines were also helpful. DISCUSSION: By including all medical specialties, nurses and physicians, and various institutions, the study provides information on how the COVID-19 mitigation also influenced those not directly involved in the COVID-19 treatment of patients. In the next stages of the pandemic response, support for healthcare professionals directly involved in outbreak-affected patients, those redeployed or those most impacted by mitigation strategies must be a priority. CONCLUSION: Empirical research of healthcare workers experiences under a pandemic are important to identify groups at risks and useful support mechanisms.
BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has imposed challenges on healthcare systems and professionals worldwide and introduced a ´maelstrom´ of ethical dilemmas. How ethically demanding situations are handled affects employees' moral stress and job satisfaction. AIM: Describe priority-setting dilemmas, moral distress and support experienced by nurses and physicians across medical specialties in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Western Norway. RESEARCH DESIGN: A cross-sectional hospital-based survey was conducted from 23 April to 11 May 2020. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical approval granted by the Regional Research Ethics Committee in Western Norway (131421). FINDINGS: Among the 1606 respondents, 67% had experienced priority-setting dilemmas the previous two weeks. Healthcare workers who were directly involved in COVID-19 care, were redeployed or worked in psychiatry/addiction medicine experienced it more often. Although 59% of the respondents had seen adverse consequences due to resource scarcity, severe consequences were rare. Moral distress levels were generally low (2.9 on a 0-10 scale), but higher in selected groups (redeployed, managers and working in psychiatry/addiction medicine). Backing from existing collegial and managerial structures and routines, such as discussions with colleagues and receiving updates and information from managers that listened and acted upon feedback, were found more helpful than external support mechanisms. Priority-setting guidelines were also helpful. DISCUSSION: By including all medical specialties, nurses and physicians, and various institutions, the study provides information on how the COVID-19 mitigation also influenced those not directly involved in the COVID-19 treatment of patients. In the next stages of the pandemic response, support for healthcare professionals directly involved in outbreak-affected patients, those redeployed or those most impacted by mitigation strategies must be a priority. CONCLUSION: Empirical research of healthcare workers experiences under a pandemic are important to identify groups at risks and useful support mechanisms.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical ethics; ethics and leadership/management; moral distress; moral/ethical climate of organisations; organisational ethics; professional ethics
Authors: Peter M Dodek; Hubert Wong; Monica Norena; Najib Ayas; Steven C Reynolds; Sean P Keenan; Ann Hamric; Patricia Rodney; Miriam Stewart; Lynn Alden Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Phyllis B Whitehead; Robert K Herbertson; Ann B Hamric; Elizabeth G Epstein; Joan M Fisher Journal: J Nurs Scholarsh Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 3.176
Authors: Thomas J Papadimos; Evadne G Marcolini; Mehrnaz Hadian; George E Hardart; Nicholas Ward; Mitchell M Levy; Stanislaw P Stawicki; Judy E Davidson Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Kathryn Ducharlet; Jennifer Philip; Hilton Gock; Mark Brown; Samantha L Gelfand; Elizabeth A Josland; Frank Brennan Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Priya-Lena Riedel; Alexander Kreh; Vanessa Kulcar; Angela Lieber; Barbara Juen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sara Huerta-González; Dolores Selva-Medrano; Fidel López-Espuela; Pedro Ángel Caro-Alonso; Andre Novo; Beatriz Rodríguez-Martín Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sonya B Norman; Jordyn H Feingold; Halley Kaye-Kauderer; Carly A Kaplan; Alicia Hurtado; Lorig Kachadourian; Adriana Feder; James W Murrough; Dennis Charney; Steven M Southwick; Jonathan Ripp; Lauren Peccoralo; Robert H Pietrzak Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2021-07-22 Impact factor: 8.128
Authors: Kathryn Ducharlet; Mayuri Trivedi; Samantha L Gelfand; Hui Liew; Lawrence P McMahon; Gloria Ashuntantang; Frank Brennan; Mark Brown; Dominique E Martin Journal: Semin Nephrol Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 5.299