Moral distress reduction using moral case deliberation in Japan: A mixed-methods study.

Aims: This study aims to develop and examine the effectiveness of a support program for reducing moral distress of nurses, based on the moral case deliberation methodology, and to study the feasibility of its implementation.

Methods: Study design was an intervention study with pre/post-comparison. The support program included a short lecture and three moral case deliberation sessions for nurses working in an acute care hospital.

Important outcomes of moral case deliberation: a Euro-MCD field survey of healthcare professionals' priorities.

Background: There is a lack of empirical research regarding the outcomes of such clinical ethics support methods as moral case deliberation (MCD). Empirical research in how healthcare professionals perceive potential outcomes is needed in order to evaluate the value and effectiveness of ethics support; and help to design future outcomes research. The aim was to use the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome Instrument (Euro-MCD) instrument to examine the importance of various MCD outcomes, according to healthcare professionals, prior to participation.

Field-testing the Euro-MCD Instrument: Experienced outcomes of moral case deliberation.

Background: Moral case deliberation is a form of clinical ethics support to help healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations. There is a lack of evidence about what outcomes healthcare professionals experience in daily practice after moral case deliberations. The Euro-MCD Instrument was developed to measure outcomes, based on the literature, a Delphi panel, and content validity testing.

Defining and categorizing outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD): concept mapping with experienced MCD participants.

Background: To support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations, Clinical Ethics Support (CES) services like Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) are increasingly implemented. To assess the impact of CES, it is important to evaluate outcomes. Despite general claims about outcomes from MCD experts and some qualitative research, there exists no conceptual analysis of outcomes yet.

[Perspectives of medical specialists on sharing decisions in cancer care: a qualitative study concerning chemotherapy decisions with patients with recurrent glioblastoma].

Background: In cancer care, difficult decisions concerning advanced treatment need to be made, weighing possible life prolongation against harmful side effects. Treatment is frequently started, showing the need to explore how decisions are made. Little is known about the perspectives of physicians on sharing decision making with patients.

Challenges in shared decision making in advanced cancer care: a qualitative longitudinal observational and interview study.

Background: Patients' preferences and expectations should be taken into account in treatment decision making in the last phase of life. Shared decision making (SDM) is regarded as a way to give the patient a central role in decision making. Little is known about how SDM is used in clinical practice in advanced cancer care.

Perspectives of Medical Specialists on Sharing Decisions in Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study Concerning Chemotherapy Decisions With Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma.

Background: In cancer care, difficult decisions concerning advanced treatment need to be made, weighing possible life prolongation against harmful side effects. Treatment is frequently started, showing the need to explore how decisions are made. Little is known about the perspectives of physicians on sharing decision making with patients.