Family presence in the trauma bay is not entirely analogous to family presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and requires a chaperone system.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(5):455-463. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.5.ecas5-1805.
The growing number of web-savvy patients alters the power dynamic in the patient-physician relationship. In the older model of care, physicians served as unchallenged experts who alone devised therapeutic plans for patients.
About 80 percent of children in the ER for suturing preferred a woman doctor; 60 percent of their parents preferred a man, 19 percent, a woman, and 21 percent, the doctor with the most experience.
Physicians new to a case might object to an established care plan. Practice variation, clinical momentum, and how value is assigned by different parties to acute care and comfort measures can each contribute to conflict in these cases.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E699-707. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.699.
Cytopathologists frequently interact directly with patients at their bedsides to perform fine needle aspiration procedures. When, if ever, should cytopathologists share preliminary diagnostic impressions directly with patients?
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(8):779-785. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.8.ecas3-1608.
Does a patient’s request not to have a diagnosis included in her health record undermine a clinician’s capacity to provide clinically and ethically appropriate treatment?
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(6):579-586. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.6.ecas2-1606.
In order to successfully resolve ethical conflicts, bioethics consultants must pay attention to process and heed stakeholders’ perspectives and values.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(5):485-492. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.5.ecas2-1605.
Given full information about the risks of long-term opioid therapy, patients often see the value of exploring other options rather than thinking their physicians are reluctant to prescribe narcotics for fear of litigation or regulatory action.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(3):202-208. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.3.ecas1-1503.