Berek Novak's Gyn 2019. Chapter 2 Principles of Patient Care

 CHAPTER 2

Principles of Patient Care

KEY POINTS

1 Professionalism is the foundation of patient care and is as much an ongoing

educational endeavor as is learning new procedures or techniques.

2 The right to privacy prohibits a physician from revealing information regarding the

patient unless the patient waives that privilege.

3 Informed consent is a process whereby the physician educates the patient about the

medical condition, associated risks and benefits of treatment, explains reasonable

medical alternatives, and explores her values in this context.

4 The concept of autonomy does not allow a patient’s wishes to take precedence over

good medical judgment.

5 For children, parents are the surrogate decision makers, except in circumstances in

which their decision is life threatening and might not be the choice a child would

make later, when individual adult beliefs and values are formed.

6 Creating a highly professional environment of safe culture, lack of harassment, high

professional behavior standards, and disclosure of unexpected outcomes benefit

patients and health professionals.

7 Prevention of burnout and maintenance of physician wellness are ethical

responsibilities of the health care system and are vital to the fiduciary relationship

between a physician and their patients.

The practice of gynecology, as with all branches of medicine, is based on ethical

principles that guide patient care. These principles and concepts create a

framework for ethical decision making that applies to all aspects of practice:

Autonomy: a person’s right to self-rule, to establish personal norms of

conduct, and to choose a course of action based on a set of personal

values and principles derived from these concepts

Confidentiality: a person’s right to autonomy in deciding how and to

whom personal medical information will be communicated

Beneficence: the obligation to promote the well-being of others or, in

medicine, to act in the best interest of the patient, defined by meeting a

goal of medicine through the care offered

Covenant: an agreement or commitment between two or more parties

for the performance of some action

Fiduciary relationship: a relationship founded on faith and trust and

the obligation to act in a trustworthy manner

Informed consent: the patient’s acceptance of a medical intervention

after adequate discussion and consideration of the nature of the

79procedure, its risks, benefits, and alternatives

Justice: medical resources should be distributed fairly and individuals

or groups have the right to claim what is due to them based on certain

personal properties or characteristics

Nonmaleficence: obliges health professionals to avoid doing harm,

assuring that benefits of interventions outweigh the potential harms of

intervention

PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN: PROFESSIONALISM

Health care providers fulfill a basic need—to preserve and advance the

health of human beings. Despite the challenges imposed by the commercial

aspects of the medical environment, for most physicians, the practice of

medicine remains very much a “calling,” a giving of oneself to the greater

good. The behavior of health professionals is evaluated in accordance with

these ethical principles and concepts by other professionals and the public

who share the belief in the “calling” of medicine. There are examples of

unprofessional behaviors that mar this professional image. They are demonstrably

easier to see in others than ourselves, including unprofessional behavior in

shouting at or mistreating others, lack of recognition of conflicts of interest that

could affect patient care, or inappropriate interactions with students, patients, or

colleagues. These behaviors, such as boundary violations or learner abuse, erode

the professional standing of the physician. Lapses do not always represent

inherent flaws in professionals, “most lapses represent deficiencies in judgment

and skill. They occur when the physician in question fails to recognize the

presence of a challenge to professionalism or lacks the skill to handle a challenge

at the time it occurs” (1). As Lucey and Souba note, [1] the solution to

unprofessional behavior is not recrimination but development of a set of skills

that allow professionals to recognize and address these professional challenges—

and those skills need to be developed and reinforced by individuals and by the

whole community of practicing physicians throughout their professional careers

(1). Professionalism is as much an ongoing educational endeavor as is learning

new procedures or techniques, and “we should assume that our peers want to be

professional and that they will welcome interventions from a trusted colleague

when circumstances suggest that a lapse is imminent” (1). [6] Creating an

environment where we can help one another in this way improves the quality and

safety of the care for our patients by preventing unprofessional behavior. An

environment without fear of recrimination, harassment, or unprofessional

behavior fosters ease in speaking up for patients’ interests and promotes

safer environments for everyone. This is a fundamental principle of

80excellence in patient care (2).

Professionalism has to balance the differences between fiduciary and

contractual relationships between physician and patient: “The kind of

minimalism that a contractualist understanding of the professional relationship

encourages produces a professional too grudging, too calculating, too lacking in

spontaneity, too quickly exhausted to go the second mile with his patients along

the road of their distress” (3). There is a relationship between physician and

patient that extends beyond a contract and assumes the elements of a fiduciary

relationship—a covenant between parties. The physician, having knowledge

about the elements of health care, assumes a trust relationship with the

patient where her interests are held paramount. Both the patient and the

physician have rights and responsibilities in this relationship, and both are

rewarded when those rights and responsibilities are upheld. Honesty,

disclosure, confidentiality, and informed consent are expressions of that trust

or covenantal relationship. This cannot be accomplished without some selfawareness on the physicians’ part. Health care systems and the governing

bodies of medicine have a similar obligation to patients in maintaining

physician health through the identification and prevention of provider

burnout or dysfunction.

Disclosing Medical Errors and Unanticipated Outcomes

[6] In creating a trustworthy and safe environment, the timely and

appropriate disclosure of unanticipated outcomes improves the trust patients

have in their health care team and, with complete documentation and

reporting, ensures that all medical errors or near misses are used to improve

the environment of care. If we are obligated as professionals by our trust

relationship with our patients, then patients should expect truthfulness, including

being made aware of individual or systemic errors, which, as Kohn et al. noted in

To Err Is Human, are inevitable in the delivery of health care (4). [6] A climate

that supports a no-fault discussion of errors creates an environment

conducive to restructuring the systems or procedures that make it possible

for errors to occur and is critical in the development of a safety culture.

Medical errors can create a keen sense of shame, humiliation, and failed

responsibility in health professionals, and efforts have begun to identify and

develop the skills and methods for disclosing and learning from them. Support for

individuals facing these feelings and preparing to disclose is critical in this

development. [6] Skills that seem common to disclosure are explaining

medical facts with honesty and truthfulness (responsibility and answering

questions), empathy (and apology), stating how future errors will be

prevented, and using good communication skills (5). These are skills that

81require training and development and should not be taken for granted. Many

institutions have risk management groups or other support groups that can be

helpful in development of skills and can accompany or lead such a discussion in

the absence of those skills. Disclosure and apology cause apprehension for

physicians—particularly in the discipline of obstetrics and gynecology where

litigation has adversely affected practice patterns (defensive medicine) and

heightened a reluctance to disclose medical errors for fear of litigation (6,7).

Apology raises particular anxiety about implying culpability and inciting

litigation, so help with framing an apology is always appropriate. The obligation

of trust (fiduciary relationship) that we have with our patients is an

important part of healing—and we owe it to our patients and ourselves to

develop the robust curricula and support at all levels of medical care to make

disclosure the step toward solution and healing that it can be for physician

and patient.

Confidentiality

The patient seeking assistance from a health professional has the right to

assurance that the information exchanged during that interaction is kept private.

[2] Privacy is essential to the trust relationship between doctor and patient.

Discussions are privileged information. The right to privacy prohibits a

physician from revealing information regarding the patient unless the

patient waives that privilege. Privileged information belongs to the patient

except when it impinges on the legal and ethical rights of institutions and society

at large, regardless of the setting. In a court situation, for example, physicians

cannot reveal information about their patients unless the patient waives that

privilege. If privilege is waived, the physician may not withhold such testimony.

[2] A physician applying the principle of autonomy will respect a patient’s

privacy and maintain a process that protects confidentiality. The right of

privacy must be maintained even when it does not seem intrinsically obvious.

A patient’s family, friend, or spiritual guide, for example, has no right to

medical information regarding the patient unless the patient specifically

approves it, except when the patient is unable to provide that guidance

because of their medical circumstance. In that circumstance, health providers

must exercise their judgment based on their assessment of the involvement of that

particular person with the patient’s health. This may seem obvious, but often can

be overlooked, such as when a health care giver receives a call from a concerned

relative inquiring about the status of a patient. The response may be a natural

attempt to reassure and inform a caring individual about the patient’s status.

However, for her own reasons, the patient may not want certain individuals

informed of her medical condition. Thus, confidentiality can unintentionally be

82breached. It is wise to ask patients about who may be involved in decision making

and who may be informed about their status. [2] If a health care giver is unclear

of the patient’s wishes regarding the person requesting information, the

reply should indicate that the patient’s permission is necessary before

discussing her status. When trying to contact patients for follow-up of

medical findings, it is never appropriate to reveal the reason for contact to an

individual other than the patient.

Record Keeping

Health care professionals are a part of record-keeping organizations. Those

records are used for multiple purposes in medicine and are a valuable tool in

patient care. There is an increasing tendency for ancillary organizations to collect,

maintain, and disclose information about individuals with whom they have no

direct connection. Health care professionals must be aware of this practice and its

ramifications. Patients sign a document, often without understanding its meaning,

upon registering with a health care institution or insurance plan. That document

waives the patient’s privilege to suppress access and gives insurers, and often

other health care providers who request it, access to the medical record. The

consequences of such disclosure for patients can be significant in terms of

insurance coverage and potential job discrimination. Even with health care reform

and improved attention to pre-existing conditions as part of that reform (8), this

continues to be a concern because individuals may have shifts in the pools of

insurance available to them and their costs may vary. This concern must be

weighed against the need for all health care providers involved with an individual

to be informed about past or present diseases or activities that may interfere with

or complicate management. The use of illegal drugs, a positive HIV test result,

genetic testing results, and even a history of cancer or psychiatric illness are all

exceptionally important to health care providers in evaluating individual patients.

When revealed to outside institutions, these factors may affect the patient’s ability

to obtain medical care, insurance, or even credit. Everything that is written in a

patient’s record should be important to the medical care of that patient, and

extrinsic information should be avoided. It is appropriate for physicians to

discuss with patients the nature of medical records and their release to other

parties so that patients can make an informed choice about such release.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was enacted

in 1996 and effective compliance of the “privacy rule” was instituted in April

2003. This rule imposed additional requirements for access to patient records for

clinical research and guidelines for protecting electronic medical records.

Although the intent of the act was laudable, the extent to which privacy is

improved is still unknown. The potential harm to the public from

83misunderstanding of HIPAA requirements or the cost of those requirements that

may inhibit critical research is also unknown. Exceptions from the requirement to

obtain patient authorization to share health information include areas such as

patient treatment, payment, operations (quality improvement, quality assurance,

and education), disclosure to public health officials and health oversight agencies,

and legal requirements (9). It is important that researchers understand the

influence of these rules in all settings; preplanning for clinical database research

to include consent for research database efforts when the patient first enters the

office or institution will make this critical research possible. The security of

medical records is a concern for individual patients and physicians and for

health systems and researchers.

Legal Considerations

The patient’s privilege to keep their records or medical information private

can be superseded by the needs of society, but only in rare circumstances.

The classic legal decision quoted for the needs of others superseding individual

patient rights is that of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (10).

That decision establishes that the special relationship between a patient and doctor

may support affirmative duties for the benefit of third persons. It requires

disclosure if “necessary to avert danger to others” but still in a fashion “that

would preserve the privacy of the patient to the fullest extent compatible with the

prevention of the threatened danger.” This principle is compatible with the

various codes of ethics that allow physicians to reveal information to protect the

welfare of the individual or the community. In other words, “the protective

privilege ends where the public peril begins” (11).

Legislation can override individual privilege. The most frequent example is

the recording of births and deaths, which is the responsibility of physicians.

Various diseases are required to be reported depending on state law (e.g., HIV

status may or may not be reportable in individual states, whereas AIDS is

reportable in all states). Reporting any injuries caused by lethal weapons, rapes,

and battering (e.g., elder and child abuse) is mandatory in some states and not

others. The regulations for the reporting of these conditions are codified by law

and can be obtained from the state health department. [4] These laws are designed

to protect the individual’s privacy as much as possible while still serving the

public’s interest. Particularly in the realm of abuse, physicians have a

complex ethical role regardless of the law. Victims of abuse must feel

supported and assured that the violent act they survived will not have an

adverse effect on how they are treated as people. Their sense of vulnerability

and their actual vulnerability may be so great that reporting an incident may

increase their risk for medical harm.

84Informed Consent

[3] Informed consent is a process that involves an exchange of information

directed toward reaching mutual understanding and informed decision

making. Ideally, informed consent should be the practical manifestation of

respect for individual patient preferences and autonomy (12). An act of

informed consent is often misunderstood to be getting a signature on a document.

The intent of the individual involved in the consent process is often the protection

of the physician from liability. Nothing could be further from either the legal or

ethical meaning of this concept.

[3] Informed consent begins with a conversation between physician and

patient that teaches the patient about the medical condition, explores her

values, and informs her about the reasonable medical alternatives. Informed

consent is an interactive discussion in which one participant has greater

knowledge about medical information and the other participant has greater

knowledge about that individual’s value system and circumstances affected by the

information. This process does not require an arduous lecture on the medical

condition or extensive examination of the patient’s psyche. It does require

adjustment of the information to the educational level of the patient and respectful

elicitation of concerns and questions. Fear that the information may frighten

patients, fear of hearing the information by the patient, a lack of ability to

comprehend technical information, the accuracy of the information given, and an

inability to express that lack are among the many barriers facing physicians and

patients engaging in this conversation (13). [1] Communication skills are part

of the art of medicine, and observation of good role models, practices, and

positive motivation can help to instill this ability in physicians.

Autonomy

[4] Informed consent arises from the principle of autonomy. Pellegrino

defines an autonomous person as “one who, in his thoughts, work, and actions, is

able to follow those norms he chooses as his own without external constraints or

coercion by others” (14). This definition contains the essence of what health care

providers must consider as informed consent. The choice to receive or refuse

medical care must be in concert with the patient’s values and be freely chosen,

and the options must be considered in light of the patient’s values.

[4] Autonomy is not respect for a patient’s wishes against good medical

judgment. Consider the example of a patient with inoperable, advanced-stage

cervical cancer who demands surgery and refuses radiation therapy. [4] The

physician’s ethical obligation is to seek the best for the patient’s survival

(beneficence) and avoid the harm (nonmaleficence) of surgery, even if that is

what the patient wishes. Physicians are not obligated to offer treatment that is of

85no benefit, and the patient has the right to refuse treatment that does not fit into

her values. Thus, this patient could refuse treatment for her cervical cancer, but

she does not have the right to be given any treatment she wishes, which in this

case is a treatment that would cause harm and no benefit.

Surrogate Decision Makers

[5] If the ability to make choices is diminished by extreme youth, mental

processing difficulties, extreme medical illness, or loss of awareness,

surrogate decision making may be required. In all circumstances, the

surrogate must make every attempt to act as the patient would have acted

(15). The hierarchy of surrogate decision makers is specified by statutory law in

each state and differs slightly from state to state. For adults, the first surrogate

decision maker in the hierarchy is usually a court-appointed guardian if one exists

and second is a durable power of attorney for health care if it exists, followed by

relatives by degree of presumed familiarity (e.g., spouse, adult children, parents).

For lesbian couples, this presents issues in some states even with changes in

federal law that make marriage for same-sex couples legal. In this situation, the

creation of a durable power of attorney can address this issue proactively.

Physicians should make sure their patients are aware of the need to have

clear instructions about who they would want to speak for them if they are

not able—in some cases it is not the person specified by the state guidelines.

For example, elderly women may not want their elderly (and slightly senile)

spouse making decisions and prefer a friend or children—and should have a

durable power of attorney for health care that ensures that will be the case.

[5] For children, parents are the surrogate decision makers, except in

circumstances in which the decision is life threatening and might not be the

choice a child would make later, when individual adult beliefs and values are

formed. The classic example of this is the Jehovah’s Witness parents who refuse

life-saving transfusions for their child (16). Although this case is the extreme, it

illustrates that the basic principle outlined for surrogate decision making should

apply to parents. Bias that influences decision making (in protection of parental

social status, income, or systems of beliefs) needs to be considered by physicians

because the potential conflict may lead parents to decisions that are not in the best

interest of the child. If there is a conflicting bias that does not allow decisions to

be made in the best interest of the child or that involves a medical threat to a

child, legal action to establish guardianship (normally through a child protective

agency by the courts) may be necessary. This action can destroy the patient

(child)–physician relationship and the parent–physician relationship. It may affect

the long-term health and well-being of the child, who must return to the care of

the parents. Such decisions should be made only after all attempts to educate,

86clarify, and find alternatives are exhausted.

[5] The legal age at which adolescents may make their own decisions

regarding their health care varies by state and national laws. There is a

growing trend to increase the participation of adolescents who are capable of

decision making for their own health care. Because minors often have developed

a value system and the capacity to make informed choices, their ability to be

involved in decisions should be assessed individually rather than relying solely on

the age criteria of the law and their parents’ views (17).

A unique area for consideration of informed consent is providing care or

conducting clinical research in foreign settings or caring for individuals from

other countries who have differing viewpoints regarding individual

autonomy. For example, if the prevailing standard for decision making by a

woman is that her closest male relative makes it for her, how is that standard

accommodated within our present autonomy-based system? In international

research, these issues presented major concerns when women were assigned to

placebo or treatment groups and consent was accepted from male relatives (18).

The potential of coercion when no other access to health care is available creates

real questions about the validity and freedom of choice for participants in entering

clinical research studies in order to access health care in under-resourced areas

(19). When caring for patients from different cultures and countries in daily

practice, it is important to recognize that these issues exist in a microcosm.

Ensuring that the patient can make the choice herself or that she freely

chooses to have a relative make it for her remains an important element of

informed consent.

Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

[1] The principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence are the basis of medical

care—the “to do good and no harm” of Hippocrates. These issues can be

clouded by other decision makers, consultants, family members, and sometimes

financial constraints or conflicts of interest. Of all the principles of good medical

care, benefit is the one that continually must be reassessed. Simple questions can

help clarify choices. What is the medical indication? How does the proposed

therapy address this issue? How much will this treatment benefit the patient? How

much will it extend the patient’s life? Does it meet a goal of medicine, such as

curing a disease, ameliorating symptoms, reducing suffering, or educating about a

disease? When confronted with multiple medical problems and consultants,

physicians should ask how much treatment will be of benefit given all the

patient’s problems (e.g., failing kidneys, progressive cardiomyopathy, HIVpositive status, and respiratory failure) rather than considering treatment of one

problem without acknowledging that the overall benefit is limited by the presence

87of all the other problems.

An additional area of balancing beneficence and nonmaleficence is

ensuring that the medicine we practice is the safest and of the highest quality

relative to medical evidence. The safety and quality agenda in medicine is

growing and necessitates consideration of the role of experience (number of

procedures, simulation for ongoing maintenance of skills and development of

skills, team training) in ensuring that our patients have access to the highest

quality of care. When evidence shows improved outcomes for specific

interventions—for example, with timing difference in preoperative antibiotics—

health care professionals must participate in and embrace efforts to achieve those

metrics on behalf of their patients as part of their fiduciary duty and their

obligation to seek the benefit of their patients. Steps specific to this in obstetrics

and gynecology are listed by the American College of Obstetricians and

Gynecologists as developing the commitment to encourage a culture of

patient safety, implementing safe medication practices, reducing the

likelihood of surgical errors, improving communication with health care

providers and patients, and working with patients to improve safety (20).

The benefit or futility of the treatment, along with quality-of-life

considerations, should be evaluated for all aspects of patient care. It is best to

weigh all of the relevant issues in a systematic fashion. Some systematic

approaches depend on a sequential gathering of all the pertinent information in

four domains: medical indications (benefit and harm), patient preferences

(autonomy), quality of life, and contextual issues (justice) (11). Other approaches

identify decision makers, followed by facts, and then ethical principles. It is

important for physicians to select an ethical model of analysis under which to

practice, one that will provide sufficient experience with an ethics-based

analytic system in order to help clarify the issues when confronting troubling

and complex decisions.

Medical Futility

The essence of good medical care in sometimes challenging situations is to

attempt to be as clear as possible about the outcomes of the proposed

interventions. If the proposed intervention (e.g., continued respiratory support or

initiating support) has a slight or highly unlikely chance of success, intervention

might be considered futile. Physicians have no obligation to continue or

initiate therapies that are not of benefit (21). The decision to withdraw or

withhold care is one that must be accompanied by an effort to ensure that the

patient or her surrogate decision maker is educated about the decision and agrees

with it. Other issues, such as family concerns, can and should modify decisions if

the overall well-being of the patient and of the family is best served. For example,

88waiting (within reason) to withdraw life support may be appropriate to allow a

family to reach consensus or a distant family member to see the patient for the last

time.

Quality of Life

Quality of life is a much used, often unclear, term. In the care of patients,

quality of life is the effect of therapy on the patient’s experience of living

based on her perspective. It is perilous to assume that health care givers

know what quality of life represents for a particular patient (11). It is

instructive to attempt to understand what is important to an individual patient’s

quality of life and seek the patient’s perspective. The results may be surprising.

For example, when offered a new drug for ovarian cancer, a patient might prefer

to decline the treatment because the side effects may not be acceptable, even

when there may be a reasonable chance that her life may be slightly prolonged.

Conversely, the physician may believe that further treatment offers little benefit

but the patient finds joy and fulfillment in entering a phase I clinical trial because

it adds meaning to her life to give information to others about the possibilities of a

new treatment. Informing patients of the experiences of others who have faced

these choices may help in decision making, but it is never a substitute for the

choice of the individual patient.

PROFESSIONAL RELATIONS

Conflict of Interest

All professionals have multiple interests that affect their decisions.

Contractual and covenantal relationships between physician and patient are

intertwined and complicated by health care payers and colleagues, which

create considerable pressure. The conflict with financial considerations

directly influences patients’ lives, often without their consent. Rennie

described that pressure eloquently: “Instead of receiving more respect (for more

responsibility), physicians feel they are being increasingly questioned,

challenged, and sued. Looking after a patient seems less and less a compact

between two people and more a match in which increasing numbers of spectators

claim the right to interfere and referee” (22). One response to this environment is

for the physician to attempt to protect his or her efforts by assuming that the

physician–patient relationship is only contractual in nature. For example, a preexisting contract, insurance, a relationship with a particular hospital system, or a

managed care plan may discourage referral to a specialist, removing the

physician’s responsibility. All health care professionals will experience this

tension between a covenantal or contractual relationship. However, the ethical

89requirement to put the patient’s best interests forward and to provide trustworthy

information about options remains.

Health Care Payers

An insurance coverage plan may demand that physicians assume the role of

gatekeeper and administrator. Patients can be penalized for a lack of knowledge

about their future desires or needs and the lack of alternatives to address the

changes in those needs. Patients are equally penalized when they develop costly

medical conditions that would not be covered if they moved from plan to plan.

These situations often place the physician in the position of being the arbiter of

patients’ coverage rather than acting as an advocate and adviser. It is an untenable

position for physicians because often they cannot change the conditions or

structure of the plan but are forced to be the administrators of it.

In an effort to improve physician interest in and compliance with

decreasing costs, intense financial conflicts of interest can be brought to bear

on physicians by health care plans or health care systems. If a physician’s

profile on costs or referral is too high, he or she might be excluded from the plan,

thus decreasing his or her ability to earn a living or to provide care to certain

patients with whom a relationship has developed. Conversely, a physician may

receive a greater salary or bonus if their management of patients causes the plan

or the health system to be more profitable.

These conflicts are substantially different from those of fee-for-service plans,

although the ultimate effect on the patient can be the same. In fee-for-service

plans, financial gain conflicts of interest have the potential to result in failure to

refer a patient or to restrict referral to those cases in which the financial gain is

derived by return referral of other patients (23). Patients who have poor insurance

coverage may be referred differently from those who have better coverage.

Patients may be unaware of these underlying conflicts of interest, a situation that

elevates conflict of interest to an ethical problem. A patient has a right to know

what her plan covers, to whom she is being referred and why, and the credentials

of those to whom she is referred. The reality is that health care providers make

many decisions under the pressure of multiple conflicts of interest. Physicians can

be caught between self-interest and professional integrity. Failure to recognize

and address conflicts of interest that impact decision making harm the relationship

of individuals and society to health care providers. [6] Focusing clearly on the

priority of the patient’s best interest and responsibly rejecting choices that

compromise the patient’s needs are ethical requirements.

Legal Problems

[6] Abuses of the system (e.g., referral for financial gain) led to proposals and

90legislation, often referred to as Stark I and II, affecting physicians’ ability to

send patients to local laboratories and facilities in which they have a

potential for financial gain. There were clearly documented abuses, but the same

legislation would negatively affect rural clinics and laboratories whose sole

source of financial support is rural physicians. States vary on the statutory

legislation regarding this issue. Regardless of the laws, it is ethically required that

financial conflicts of interest are revealed to patients (24–26).

Another abuse of the physician–patient relationship caused by financial

conflicts of interest is fraudulent Medicare and Medicaid billings. This

activity resulted in the Fraud and Abuse Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. at 1320a–7b),

which prohibits any individual or entity making false claims or soliciting or

receiving any remuneration in cash or any kind, directly or indirectly, overtly or

covertly, to induce a referral. Indictments under these laws are felonies, with

potential fines, jail sentences, and loss of the license to practice medicine.

Physicians should be aware of the legal ramifications of their referral and billing

practices.

Harassment

The goal of medicine is excellence in the care of patients and, often, research

and education that will advance the practice of medicine. Everyone involved

in the process should be able to pursue the common goal on equal footing and

without harassment that interferes with employees’, learners’, or colleagues’

ability to work or be promoted equally in that environment. Every office and

institution should have an assessment strategy to ensure that the work

environment is conducive to focusing on work and learning and not hostile to

individuals.

Every office and institution must have written policies on discrimination

and sexual harassment that detail inappropriate behavior and state-specific

steps to be taken to correct an inappropriate situation and make sure they

are widely accessible and available. The goal is to ensure appropriate reporting

and procedures for taking appropriate action and protecting victims, educating or

rehabilitating an offender, and preventing the reoccurrence of the behavior.

In the United States, the legal support for this right is encoded in both statutory

law through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. at 2000e–2000e–17 [West

1981 and Supp. 1988]) and reinforced with judicial action (case or precedent law)

by state and U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Charges of sexual harassment can be

raised as a result of unwelcome sexual conduct or a hostile workplace. Employees

are not the only ones to experience sexual or other harassment; learners such as

medical students or nursing students can experience it and have a high reported

prevalence of it. Sexual or other harassment for students can interfere with the

91educational process and trigger federal discrimination liability, including loss of

federal funds encoded in Title IX protections (27).

Stress Management, Burnout and Prevention

[7] In addition to the acknowledged stress of the time pressures and

responsibility of a career in medicine, the health care environment is

associated with an increasing incidence of physician burnout, a serious threat

to physician wellness and the safety and quality of care that their workforce

provides. Addressing this problem is a shared responsibility of the physicians

themselves and the health care systems where they work. Individual physician

responsibility should include awareness and education about this issue, addressing

professional priorities, and having a plan for work–life balance that includes selfcare and wellness.

Burnout is a work-related syndrome characterized by emotional exhaustion,

depersonalization, and feelings of low personal accomplishment. Practitioners

who are burned out have been found to have higher rates of depression, alcohol

abuse, and suicidal ideation and are more likely to have experienced medical

errors in their practice (28–30). Physician burnout is associated with absenteeism,

lapses in professionalism, and early retirement. There is a widening gap in

satisfaction with work–life balance and increase in burnout among US physicians,

with burnout in obstetrician–gynecologists measured over 50%, second only to

emergency medicine physicians (31). This level of distress puts the field of

obstetrics and gynecology at risk for depletion of qualified providers, with

physicians and others retiring early or leaving medicine entirely.

Addressing burnout in our specialty requires support for physicians through

focus on the workplace drivers of this problem, of which there are many. Time

spent directly with patients is an important source of reward for physicians and

this time is limited by organizational and regulatory demands that are

compounded by market forces. Loss of physician autonomy and resultant

excessive administrative tasks consume already limited time, distancing

physicians from the meaning and value of their work, thereby diminishing the

rewards associated with work. In a study of obstetrics and gynecology providers

done in collaboration with the AMA, the strongest single predictor of emotional

resilience and sense of accomplishment for individual physicians was control over

schedule and hours worked (32).

[6] Alignment of values between the worker and the [7] workplace, enhancing

communication, establishing a culture of respect, mutual support, and expressing

appreciation, have all been shown to improve efficiency, reduce errors, and

improve workflow in physician practices and are most effective when supported

by leadership. High-quality leaders prioritize improvement of workplace culture

92and creation of community along with nurturing support for flexibility and

physician work–life balance. Strength in leadership, measured by composite

leadership scores, is strongly correlated with decrease in burnout (33,34). The

personal experience of burnout frequently involves loss of meaning and joy in

one’s work, isolation, and lack of community. For busy clinicians, isolation has

become an occupational hazard and mindfulness or reflective practice in groups

can be a very effective outlet. Some data reflect that getting physicians together

for a meeting or a meal improves camaraderie and decreases burnout (34,35).

[7] All physicians should develop personal awareness and a commitment to a plan

for self-care. Various strategies have been advocated and studied to prevent

burnout, and there is no uniform approach that will be successful for every

physician. Definition of values or what is most important in life can clarify

priorities and facilitate setting limits, establishing time away from work, and

planning time for relationships or other revitalizing activities. Many preventative

measures and interventions involve wellness practices, stress reduction, and

reconnection with the meaning of work and the reasons why physicians entered

medical careers. Contemplative practices including mindfulness meditation,

cultivation of awareness, and narrative medicine are interventions that have been

studied in prevention or amelioration of physician burnout (36). Writing a mission

statement reflecting why the physician chose medicine has been recommended as

a simple strategy to refocus on the meaning of work.

Though formal mindfulness practice is not for everyone, focusing on the

moment, the self, or the breath can allow for regrouping and improve one’s sense

of being grounded and more in control. Small actionable steps such as improving

sleep and exercise and setting boundaries on work time can help. Specific

wellness practices and their relationship to burnout have been studied in US

surgeons. Incorporating a strategy that prioritized work–life balance, focusing on

what is most important in life, and finding meaning in one’s work were all found

to be helpful in reducing burnout (37). General health habits such as exercise and

attending primary care visits have also been found to be important.

Women’s health care providers have a significant risk for burnout and face

poorer personal, mental, and physical health; increased medical errors;

disengagement; and resultant early retirement. Professional well-being is

important for our patients and for the career, personal, and family life of the

individual physician.

SOCIETY AND MEDICINE

Justice

[1] Some of the ethical and legal problems in the practice of gynecology relate to

93the fair and equitable distribution of burdens and benefits. How benefits are

distributed is a matter of great debate. There are various methods of proposed

distribution:

Equal shares (everyone has the same number of health care dollars per

year)

Need (only those people who need health care get the dollars)

Queuing (the first in line for a transplant gets it)

Merit (those with more serious illnesses receive special benefits)

Contribution (those who have paid more into their health care fund get

more health care)

Each of these principles could be appropriate as a measure of just allocation of

health care dollars, but each will affect individual patients in different ways. Just

distribution has become a major issue in health care. The principles of justice

apply only when the resource is desired or beneficial and to some extent scarce

(38).

The traditional approach to medicine was for practitioners to accept the intense

focus on the individual patient. Changes in medicine will alter the focus from the

patient to a population: “in the emerging medicine, the presenting patient, more

than ever before, will be a representative of a class, and the science that makes

possible the care of the patient will refer prominently to the population from

which that patient comes” (39). Physicians increasingly have accumulating

outcomes data (population statistics) to modify the treatment of an individual in

view of the larger population statistics. If, for example, the outcome of radical

ovarian cancer debulking is only 20% successful in a patient with a certain set of

medical problems, that debulking may be offered instead to someone who has an

85% chance of success. Theoretically, the former individual might have a

successful debulking and the procedure might fail in the latter, but population

statistics were used to allocate this scarce resource. The benefit was measured by

statistics that predict success, not by other forms of justice allocation by need,

queuing, merit, or contribution. This approach represents a major change in the

traditional dedication of health care solely to the benefits, however small, of

individual patients. With scarce resources, the overall benefits for all patients are

considered in conjunction with the individual benefits for one patient.

There was always inequity in the distribution of health care access and

resources. This inequity is not seen by those health care providers who do not

care for the patients who are unable to gain access, such as those who lack

transportation, live in rural areas, or where limits are imposed by lack of health

care providers, time, and financial resources. Social discrimination leads to

94inequity in the distribution of health care. Racial and ethnic minorities are less

likely to see private physicians or specialists, with clear impacts on outcomes of

care, regardless of their income or source of health care funding (40). Thus, health

care is rationed by default.

To reform the health care system requires judicial, legislative, business

mandates, and attention to the other social components that can pose obstacles to

the efforts to expand health care beyond a focus on individual patients.

Health Care Reform

The tension between understanding health as an inherently individual matter

(in which the receipt of health care is critical to individual well-being) and as

a communal resource (in which distribution of well-being throughout society

is the goal) underpins much of the political and social debate surrounding

health care reform (41). The questions of health care reform are twofold: (1)

What is the proper balance between individual and collective good? and (2) Who

will pay for basic health care? Because much of health care reform requires

balancing competing goals, legislation to achieve reform should specifically

address how this balance can be achieved. The role of government can be:

Regulating access of individuals to health care

Regulating potential harms to the public health (e.g., smoking, pollution,

drug use)

Promoting health practices of benefit to large populations (e.g.,

immunization, fluoridation of water)

Even with the changes in health care structure in the United States, health care

payers, not individual providers, often make decisions regarding the distribution

of and access to coverage and resources. The health insurance industry determines

what are “reasonable and customary” charges and what will be covered. The

government decides (often with intense special-interest pressure) what Medicare

and Medicaid will cover. These decisions directly affect patient care. For that

reason, health care providers cannot ethically remain silent when the health and

well-being of their individual patients and their communities are adversely

affected by health care reform decisions.

Research on the outcomes of care provided by gynecologists or affected

adversely by systems for financing health care (financial aspects, safety,

quality-of-life measures, survival, morbidity, and mortality) will allow the

discipline to have a voice in determining choices for women’s health care.

This is an ethically important responsibility for all women’s health care

preference

Nhận xét