'Poking the skunk': Ethical and medico‐legal concerns in research about patients' experiences of medical injury.
Improving how health care providers respond to medical injury requires an understanding of patients' experiences. Although many injured patients strongly desire to be heard, research rarely involves them. Institutional review boards worry about harming participants by asking them to revisit traumati...
| Publicado en: | Bioethics Vol. 33; no. 8; pp. 948 - 958 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Oct2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=138688875&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 138688875 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 02699702 6PJ jtl: Bioethics issn: 02699702 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Oct2019 vid: 33 iid: 8 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 138688875 10.1111/bioe.12599 ppf: 948 ppct: 10 formats: tig: atl: 'Poking the skunk': Ethical and medico‐legal concerns in research about patients' experiences of medical injury. aug: au: Schulz Moore, Jennifer Mello, Michelle M. Bismark, Marie affil: University of New South Wales Law School, Sydney New South Wales, Australia Stanford Law School and Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, Stanford CA, USA Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne Victoria, Australia su: New Zealand United States Emergency medical services Fear Medical research Patients Psychological stress Human research subjects Medical research laws Risk assessment Institutional review boards Psychology of Research personnel sug: subj: Emergency medical services Fear Medical research Patients Psychological stress Human research subjects New Zealand United States Emergency and Other Relief Services Municipal police services Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology) Medical research laws Risk assessment Institutional review boards Psychology of Research personnel keyword: ethics injury medical error patient research trauma ethics injury medical error patient research trauma ab: Improving how health care providers respond to medical injury requires an understanding of patients' experiences. Although many injured patients strongly desire to be heard, research rarely involves them. Institutional review boards worry about harming participants by asking them to revisit traumatic events, and hospital staff worry about provoking lawsuits. Institutions' reluctance to approve this type of research has slowed progress toward responses to injuries that are better able to meet patients' needs. In 2015–2016, we were able to surmount these challenges and interview 92 injured patients and families in the USA and New Zealand. This article explores whether the ethical and medico‐legal concerns are, in fact, well‐founded. Consistent with research about trauma‐research‐related distress, our participants' accounts indicate that the pervasive fears about retraumatization are unfounded. Our experience also suggests that because being heard is an important (but often unmet) need for injured patients, talking provides psychological benefits and may decrease rather than increase the impetus to sue. Our article makes recommendations to institutional review boards and researchers. The benefits to responsibly conducted research with injured patients outweigh the risks to participants and institutions. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|