Skip to main content

Clinical Ethics and Patient Safety

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Patient Safety
  • 358 Accesses

Abstract

Patient safety and ethics are interrelated concepts. Clinical ethics is similar to other clinical practices and can be evaluated and improved using basic quality improvement principles. Distilling ethical issues clinically can be facilitated by identifying specific elements of safety and how they are affected by the ethical concerns. In addition, promoting patient safety rests on core ethical principles ubiquitous in medicine—the professional duties to provide benefit and prevent harm. Tying these ethical principles to quality and safety analysis has been a strong motivator in quality and safety improvement. Further, describing safety issues in terms of ethical responsibilities has the potential to motivate individual providers to improve quality and safety within their personal practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Beachamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 4th ed. Oxford University Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  2. The term “clinical ethics” describes an area of practice that a provider may have special training in, or the skill set any provider uses in addressing ethical issues in say to day practice. Fully defining and describing the term is outside the scope of this chapter but further information can be found at sites like http://www.asbh.org/publications/content/core.html. Last accessed 4-22-12.

  3. Several cases have addressed this issue. For an example of the legal reasoning see Bouvia v Superior Court, 179 Cal. App 3d 1127. 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. An example of the implementation of New York state’s 2010 Family Healthcare Decisions Act in an academic medical center can be found at http://www.amc.edu/academic/bioethics/documents/AMC_FHCDA_Article.pdf.

  6. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(25):1635–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. National Academy Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Morrison RS, Penrod JD, Cassel JB, et al. Cost savings associated with United States hospital palliative care consultation programs. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(16):1783–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dull SM, Graves JR, Larsen MP, Cummins RO. Expected death and unwanted resuscitation in the prehospital setting. Ann Emerg Med. 1994;23(5):997–1002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. An early case, Wright v. Johns Hopkins Health Systems Corp., 353 Md. 568, 585–86, 1999, found no liability for unwanted resuscitation but there have been more legal challenges in other states and the claim is gaining favor in ethics and legal discussions of the issue.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Greer GW, Circuit Judge. 2000-02-11. In re: the guardianship of Theresa Marie Schiavo, Incapacitated, File No. 90-2908GD-003. Florida Sixth Judicial Circuit, p. 9–10. Retrieved 2006-01-08.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hickman SE, Nelson CA, Perrin NA, Moss AH, Hammes BJ, Tolle SW. A comparison of methods to communicate treatment preferences in nursing facilities: traditional practices versus the physician orders for life-sustaining treatment program. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(7):1241–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. POLST.org describes the orders and summarizes which states have enacted formal POLST type laws. www.polst.com. Accessed 4-22-12.

  14. Patient Self Determination Act, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 Pub.L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. http://www.acgme.org/acwebsite/RRC_280/280_corecomp.asp. Accessed 4-22-12.

  16. American Medical Association, Code of Medical Ethics, Opinion 9.045 Physicians with Disruptive Behavior. Available at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion9045.page. Accessed 4-22-12.

  17. American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics, Principles of Medical Ethics. Available at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/principles-medical-ethics.page? Accessed 7-1-12.

  18. http://www.jointcommission.org/core_measure_sets.aspx. Last accessed 4-22-12.

  19. Medicare Process of Care Measures. http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/HospitalProcessOfCareMeasures.html. Last accessed 4-22-12; Medicare Outcome Measures. http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/OutcomeMeasures.html. Last accessed 4-22-12.

  20. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5116a1.htm. Last accessed 7-1-12.

  21. Center for Innovation in Quality Patient Care, Johns Hopkins Medicine. Available at http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/innovation_quality_patient_care/areas_expertise/infections_complications/hand_hygiene/.

  22. Wachter RM, Pronovost PJ. Balancing “no blame” with accountability in patient safety. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(14):1401–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. McDonald O. Disruptive physician behavior. QuantiaMD and American College of Physician Executives; 2011. Available at https://www.quantiamd.com/home/qrc_disruptive. Accessed 4-22-12.

  24. Institute of Medicine. To err is human. National Academy Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Egan, E.A. (2023). Clinical Ethics and Patient Safety. In: Agrawal, A., Bhatt, J. (eds) Patient Safety. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35933-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35933-0_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-35932-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-35933-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics