Search

Medical decisions about pediatric gastroenterology pathologies often involve collaboration between the medical team and the family. On occasions, conflict may arise between the individuals involved in decision making (team-family conflict) causing delays in managing a child's health condition. Little is known on the strategies that can be implemented to address such conflicts. Using the systematic review model by McCullough et al., an electronic literature search was conducted using PUBMED databases and SCOPUS. Studies published between 2001 and 2022 were analyzed to identify high-risk families, the barriers and facilitators involved in the team-family conflict and the circumstances in which healthcare professionals can be ethically justified to override parents' medical decisions and to trigger the state intervention. The present review provides recommendations on the more suitable ways to manage team-family conflict and gives a practical approach using a case vignette., (© 2024 European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.)

Though artificial intelligence (AI) is being widely implemented in gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology and has the potential to be paradigm shifting for clinical practice, its pitfalls must be considered along with its advantages. Currently, although the use of AI is limited in practice to supporting clinical judgment, medicine is rapidly heading toward a global environment where AI will be increasingly autonomous. Broader implementation of AI will require careful ethical considerations, specifically related to bias, privacy, and consent. Widespread use of AI raises concerns related to increasing rates of systematic errors, potentially due to bias introduced in training datasets. We propose that a central repository for collection and analysis for training and validation datasets is essential to overcoming potential biases. Since AI does not have built-in concepts of bias and equality, humans involved in AI development and implementation must ensure its ethical use and development. Moreover, ethical concerns regarding data ownership and health information privacy are likely to emerge, obviating traditional methods of obtaining patient consent that cover all possible uses of patient data. The question of liability in case of adverse events related to use of AI in GI must be addressed among the physician, the healthcare institution, and the AI developer. Though the future of AI in GI is very promising, herein we review the ethical considerations in need of additional guidance informed by community experience and collective expertise., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Clinical practice guidelines assist healthcare professionals in providing evidence-based care. However, pharmaceutical companies' financial interests often influence guideline content. This study aimed to elucidate the magnitude of financial ties among Japanese gastroenterology guideline authors and the pharmaceutical industry., Methods: Using pharmaceutical company disclosed payment data, we evaluated financial conflicts of interest (COI) among Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline authors between 2016 and 2021. Additionally, we assessed the evidence quality supporting guideline recommendations and associations with financial COI. Finally, we evaluated author COI management during guideline development against global standards., Results: Overall, 88.2% (231/262) of guideline authors received a median of $12 968 (interquartile range [IQR]: $1839-$70 374) in payments between 2016 and 2019 for lectures, writings, and consulting. Chairpersons received significantly higher payments (median: $86 444 [IQR: $15 455-$165 679]). Notably, 41 (15.6%) authors had undeclared payments exceeding declaration requirements. Low or very low-quality evidence supported 41.0% of recommendations. There was a negative association between the median 4-year payment per author and the proportion of recommendations based on low-quality evidence (odds ratio: 0.966 [95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.945-0.987], P = 0.002) and positive association with moderate-quality evidence (odds ratio: 1.018 [95% CI: 1.011-1.025], P < 0.001). Still, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline development process remains less transparent, with insufficient COI policies relative to global standards., Conclusion: There were extensive financial COI between pharmaceutical companies and guideline authors, and more than 40% of recommendations were based on low-quality evidence. More rigorous and transparent COI policies for guideline development adhering to global standards are warranted., (© 2022 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital health raise concerns about equitable access to innovative interventions, appropriate use of health data and privacy, inclusiveness, bias and discrimination, and even changes to the clinician-patient relationship. This article outlines a number of ethical and legal issues when examining the use of AI in gastroenterology. Substantive ethico-legal principles including respect for persons, privacy and confidentiality, integrity, conflict of interest, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, are discussed. Much of what we articulated is relevant to the use of AI in other medical fields. Going forward, consorted efforts should be use to address more particular and concrete problems, but for now, a principle-based approach is best used in problem-solving., (© 2021 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Mental health disorders in adolescents present some of the most challenging of all ethical dilemmas. This is particularly true when they lead to self-injurious behavior that can only be prevented by either limiting the freedom of the adolescent or forcing treatments on them that they do not want. Intentional and repeated foreign-body ingestion (FBI) in youth is a poorly understood self-injurious behavior that can be life-threatening. It poses unique clinical and ethical challenges. Ingestion of sharp or magnetic objects increases the need for endoscopic retrieval or surgical intervention with associated risks, including perforation and anesthesia-related adverse events. When behavior modification efforts fail to prevent recurrent FBI, the cumulative risk of medical intervention mounts. Sometimes, as a last resort, doctors consider surgical procedures that limit jaw movement and may physically prevent recurrent FBI. In this Ethics Rounds article, we present a case in which doctors consider whether it is in the best interest of a teenager with this behavior to undergo orthodontic jaw wiring as a next step in treatment of repeated FBI. Doctor commentary on the ethical decision-making process is provided., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Biosimilars use raises uncertainties with regards to efficacy despite potentially significant cost reductions. This requires a classical harm-benefit analysis. Important stakeholders include physicians and patients, companies producing biologica (drugs containing biotechnology-derived proteins as active substance), and companies producing biosimilars, as well as health insurance companies and politicians. They all have their distinct interests. In a rule-setting process, transparency is needed to protect the trust between patients and physicians. In an ideal world, the price of biologica without patent protection would be negotiated in a way that makes biosimilars unnecessary., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Ethical issues have become increasingly important in gastroenterology research. This is for several reasons, including (i) an understanding of how conflicts of interest might affect research, (ii) the influence of the drug and device industries on research, (iii) ghostwriting (taking credit for something you did not write), (iv) the occurrence of ethically inappropriate research and scientific misconduct, and (v) respect for the rights of research subjects. These include the rights (i) to give informed consent to participate after understanding the purposes, risks, and benefits of the research; (ii) to ask questions; and (iii) to withdraw from participation at any time. Notions of doing good (beneficence), avoiding harm (non-maleficence), confidentiality, and, most important, the primacy of the welfare of the patient or research subject can be traced to antiquity. In the modern era, the Nuremburg Code (1947), the Declaration of Helsinki (1964), the Belmont report (1979), and other events and reports have led to the refinement of ethical practices in both clinical and research domains, have reinforced those long observed principles, and have given rise to the newer principles of autonomy and justice. The ethical conduct of research not only promotes good research but also is in the best interests of research subjects, investigators, sponsors, patients, and the public., (© 2015 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Throughout the past 20 years, the rising use of social media has revolutionized health care as well as other businesses. It allows large groups of people to create and share information, ideas, and experiences through online communications, and develop social and professional contacts easily and inexpensively. Our Gastroenterology organizations, among others, have embraced this technology. Although the health-care benefits may be many, social media must be viewed through a legal lens, recognizing the accompanying burdens of compliance, ethical, and litigation issues. Theories of liability and risk continue to evolve as does the technology. Social media usage within the medical community is fraught with potential legal issues, requiring remedial responses to meet patients' needs and comply with current laws, while not exposing physicians to medical malpractice and other tort risks.

Fiction (i.e. novels, short stories, and movies) provides an opportunity for imaginative moral reflection and can serve as a basis for moral argument. Narratives play a role in moral reasoning because they are exemplars as well as tests. Those who care for sick people, should be interested in patient's and literary stories. Exploring the representation of gastroenterological ailments in fiction gives insight in the experience of undergoing colonoscopy, farting, pain, the borders of intimacy, hygiene and the lack of it, taboos and the doctor-patient-relationship. Included authors are, among others: Michel Faber, Alan Bennett, Charles Bukowski, Charlotte Roche and James Joyce. Several movies are discussed as well. Though in general gastroenterological problems don't seem often at foreground in fiction, in some cases they are represented in a more symbolic way, and touch upon some fundamental aspects of the human condition., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The optimal care of patients with inflammatory bowel disease depends on adherence to standards of care regarding diagnosis, informing the patient of potential risks of treatment, obtaining recommended baseline studies, and monitoring the patient for efficacy and adverse effects. In clinical research as well as practice, financial conflicts of interest must be disclosed and managed to insure that patients have sufficient information to make a decision regarding participation in a study and to insure their safety. Medical education of care-givers in training carries the obligation and liability to oversee the care of the IBD patient and insure that safe and optimal care. This review addresses medicolegal issues that can arise in the care of the patient with IBD. Clinicians who provide optimal care for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) must employ appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic options and also adhere to standards of care and ethical principles. Ethical and medicolegal issues can arise from the failure to adhere to the standards of medical care, clinical research and education. In a report in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2011, gastroenterologists in the U.S. ranked 6th out of 26 subspecialities as the most commonly sued for malpractice, with the mean payment to the plaintiff of just under $200,000 [1]. It is noteworthy that two other specialties that involve invasive procedures ranked lower on the list than Gastroenterology. For example, Cardiology and Anesthesiology ranked 11th and 17th, respectively. In this review, nine of the pitfalls to adherence to the standards of practice for IBD are reviewed.

A working group from across Canada comprised of clinician and basic scientists, epidemiologists, ethicists, Health Canada regulatory authorities and representatives of major funding agencies (Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of Canada) met to review the current experience with fecal microbial therapy and to identify the key areas of study required to move this field forward. The report highlights the promise of fecal microbial therapy and related synthetic stool therapy (together called 'microbial ecosystems therapeutics') for the treatment of Clostridium difficile colitis and, possibly, other disorders. It identifies pressing clinical issues that need to be addressed as well as social, ethical and regulatory barriers to the use of these important therapies.

The medical device and pharmaceutical industry is facing mounting pressure to produce cost-effectiveness and clinical-effectiveness data in order for their products to be acceptable for approval by the Federal Drug Administration and then for payer reimbursement. The implications of these increasing burdens on our field will become apparent in everyday practice. This article outlines these challenges and discusses possible ways to improve the situation., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Too often, actions and decisions affecting patient care are determined by expediency, cost-effectiveness, and time constraints. At risk of sacrifice are ethics and professionalism, pillars essential to the very structure of medical practice. In particular, there appears to be an erosion of consultation etiquette-exchanges between physicians and patients as well as among physicians. While methods to maximize efficiency are essential to medical practice, they should not come at the expense of etiquette. To improve patient care and strengthen relationships between patients and physicians, as well as relationships between referring and consulting physicians, a set of guidelines for improving consultation etiquette is proposed.

Introduction: In the era of the new millennium, a lot of preclinical and clinical research is published. However, ethico-legal, cost-effectiveness and patient care issues are not addressed equally., Aim: To investigate whether abstracts presented at major international gastroenterology congresses refer to issues relevant to doctor-patient relationship, cost-effectiveness and care., Methods: We reviewed the abstracts on disk CD-ROMs of the United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW) and the Digestive Disease Week (DDW), for the years 1998-2006. We used the following keywords: ethical/ethically, legal, consent, cost-effective/effectiveness, care, quality and tolerable/tolerability., Results: Over the study period, 1,612/20,018 (8.05%) and 764/45,628 (1.67%) abstracts including the above keywords were presented at UEGW and DDW congresses (p = 0.013), respectively. Statistically significant more abstracts containing separately any of the key words (apart from 'legal') were presented at the UEGW than at the DDW congress. There was a significant trend of increased referring to these key words over the study period for UEGW (p < 0.041) but not for DDW congresses (p = 0.70)., Conclusion: The abstracts presented at the UEGW refer to ethico-legal, cost-effectiveness and patient care issues more frequently than those presented at the DDW. There is a trend of increased referring to these subjects at the UEGW but not at the DDW., ((c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Over the past 30 years, the population of old-aged citizens in most Western countries has been dramatically increasing. These people usually have several comorbidities and often lose their independence, mostly due to neurodegenerating diseases. Benign and malignant gastrointestinal disorders are very common in all age groups, but their incidence increases with age, requiring investigation and therapy. In this setting several ethical issues arise, mostly related to the extent of invasive investigations, adverse drug reactions due to polypharmacy, the risk:benefit ratio of endoscopic therapy, and the quality and validity of informed consent in this frail elderly population.

Physicians' relationships with industry derive from the moral imperative to advocate and work for the best interests of patients. Private industry generally operates to satisfy the best interests of the stockholders or owners. Conflicts arise between these interests and are magnified by the inequality of the financial positions of physicians and industry. Because the ultimate consumer of the products (drugs, medical devices, etc.) of the biomedical industry must enlist a physician as an intermediary, the physician has become the target of industry in a sophisticated marketing effort that includes the offering of financial and other incentives. These conflicts and incentives are pervasive throughout clinical and research endeavors. Standards for resolution, if not elimination, of these conflicts have been proposed by various respected organizations. Individual physicians and medical organizations should evaluate these standards and, if pertinent and appropriate, endorse and follow them.

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common and costly disorder in Canada. The paucity of medical treatment underscores the importance of examining every element of the management approach. Data exist supporting an increased prevalence of abuse among individuals with IBS. Importantly, the pathophysiology underlying the link between abuse and IBS is increasingly understood. Treatment recommendations by opinion leaders support an abuse inquiry. However, many clinicians view abuse inquiry as an ethical dilemma., Method: Canadian gastroenterologists were surveyed to determine current practice patterns and to identify barriers to inquiry. Barriers cited by clinicians were explored within an ethical context., Results: Abuse inquiry is not universally practised in Canada. Fifty-four per cent of the membership of Canadian Association of Gastroenterologists responded to the survey. They reported inquiring into abuse histories in approximately 50% of patients with IBS. The frequency of inquiry declined when male patients were considered. The primal barriers cited were time constraints (25%), personal comfort with abuse issues (25%) and lack of resources for addressing the abuse (33%). Importantly, only a minority (10%), cited abuse history as irrelevant to the management of the patient., Interpretation: Physicians identify significant barriers to pursuing an inquiry into abuse. However, a minority cited 'clinical irrelevance' as a primal barrier, the implicit statement being that the abuse history has clinical relevance. This view is consistent with opinion leaders and published treatment recommendations. Therefore, by not inquiring into the abuse history, physicians are not fulfilling their ethical responsibility to the patient. Physicians need to resolve their barriers to inquiry. Furthermore, they need to familiarize themselves with treatment recommendations and include this review in their consultation.

Previously doctors decided what was right or wrong in medicine, today our individual freedom is more limited. External influences including the human rights act, government initiatives, management protocols, professional guidelines, multi-disciplinary decision-making and financial restrictions intervene between the doctor and the patient. Furthermore the move away from paternalism in the doctor-patient relationship to patient empowerment (informed consent) has put patients in charge of their medical destiny. Increased public expectations leading to health screening, genetic profiling and treatment of unwanted physiological changes mean that doctors now manage healthy patients for 'potential' or 'virtual' disease. This implies a greater ethical burden than treatment of the sick. Finally, death is no longer regarded by many as a physiological process, but a consequence of disease. The investigation and management of patients with incurable conditions can lead to difficult ethical dilemmas. Gastroenterology and endoscopy generate specific ethical problems which among others include training in endoscopy, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement, informed consent and live endoscopy demonstrations. This article addresses some of these issues in order to draw attention to potential difficulties in modern ethical practice. It should be read in conjunction with the other publications stemming from the 1st Symposium on Ethics in Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Kos, June 2002., (Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel)