Evaluation of clinical ethics support services and its normativity

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 39, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 681-685

  Schildmann, Jan ^a   Molewijk, Bert ^b,c   Benaroyo, Lazare ^d   Forde, Reidun ^c   Neitzke, Gerald ^e  

^a RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

^e HANNOVER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; EVALUATION STUDY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; METHODOLOGY;

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS, CLINICAL; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84886752694     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100697     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Førde R, Pedersen R, Akre R. Clinicians' evaluation of clinical ethics consultations in Norway: a qualitative study. Med Health Care Philos 2008;11:17-25.
2. Førde R, Hansen RWR. Involving patients and relatives in a Norwegian clinical ethics committee: what have we learned? Clin Ethics 2009;4:121-30.
3. Fox E, Arnold RA. Evaluating outcomes in ethics consultation research. J Clin Ethics 1996;7:127-38.
4. Hope T, Slowther A. Clinical ethics committees: they can change clinical practice but need evaluation. BMJ 2000;321:649-50.
5. Molewijk B, Verkerk M, Milius H, et al. Implementing moral case deliberation in a psychiatric hospital: process and outcome. Med Health Care Philos 2008;11:43-56.
6. Molewijk B, ZadelhoffE, Lendemeijer B, et al. Implementing moral case deliberation in Dutch health care: improving moral competency of professionals and quality of care. Bioethica Forum 2008;1:57-65.
7. Schildmann J, Vollmann J. Evaluation of clinical ethics consultation: a systematic review and critical appraisal of research methods and outcome criteria. In: Schildmann J, Gordon J, Vollmann J, eds. Clinical ethics consultation: theories- methods-evaluation. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2010:203-15.
8. Hoffmann D. Evaluating ethics committees: a view from the outside. Milbank Q 1993;71:677-701.
9. Pfäfflin M, Kobert K, Reither-Theil S. Evaluating clinical ethics consultation: a European perspective. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2009;18:406-19.
10. Williamson L. Empirical assessments of clinical ethics services: implications for clinical ethics committees. Clin Ethics 2007;2:187-92.
11. Craig JM, May T. Evaluation of the outcomes of ethics consultation. J Clin Ethics 2006;17:168-80.
12. La Puma J, Stocking CB, DiMartini A, et al. An ethics consultation service in a teaching hospital: Utilization and evaluation. J Am Med Assoc 1988;260:808-11.
13. Tulsky JA, Fox E. Evaluating ethics consultation: framing the questions. J Clin Ethics 1996;7:109-15.
14. Molewijk B, Widdershoven G. Report of the Maastricht meeting of the European Clinical Ethics Network (ECEN). Clin Ethics 2007;2:45.
15. Pedersen R, Hurst S, Schildmann J, et al. The development of a descriptive evaluation tool for clinical ethics case consultations. Clin Ethics 2010;5:136-41.
16. White JC, Dunn PM, Homer L. A practical instrument to evaluate ethics consultations. HEC Forum 1997;9:228-46.
17. Schneiderman LJ, Gilmer T, Teetzel HD, et al. Effect of ethics consultations on nonbeneficial life-sustaining treatments in the intensive care setting: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc 2003;290:1166-72.
18. Schneiderman LJ, Gilmer T, Teetzel HD, et al. Dissatisfaction with ethics consultations: the Anna Karenina principle. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2006;15:101-6.
19. Abma T, Molewijk B, Widdershoven GAM. Good care in ongoing dialogue. Improving the quality of care through moral deliberation and responsive evaluation. Health Care Anal 2009;17:217-35.
20. van der Dam S, Abma TA, Molewijk AC, et al. Organizing moral case deliberation in mixed groups: experiences in two Dutch nursing homes. Nurs Ethics 2011;18:327-40.
21. Dauwerse L, Abma T, Molewijk B, et al. Need for ethics support in healthcare institutions: views of Dutch board members and ethics support staff. J Med Ethics 2011;37:456-60.
22. Baur V, Abma T, Widdershoven G. Participation of marginalized groups in evaluation: Mission impossible? Eval Program Plann 2011;33:238-45.
23. Weidema F, Molewijk B, Widdershoven G, et al. Enacting ethics. Bottom-up involvement in implementing moral case deliberation. Health Care Anal 2011;20:1-19.
24. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Fourth generation evaluation. London: Sage, 1989.
25. Stake RE. To evaluate an arts program. In: Stake RE, ed. Evaluating the arts in education-A responsive approach. Colombus, Ohio: Merrill, 1975:13-31.
26. Stake RE. Standards-based and responsive evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004.
27. Greene J. Stakeholder participation and utilization program evaluation. Eval Rev 1988;12:91-116.
28. Lüders C. Review essay: Evaluation as practical hermeneutics-or the long and stony road from a theory of practice to evaluation practice. Forum Qual Soc Res. Published 5 Jan 2004, http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/634 (accessed Mar 2012).
29. Widdershoven G, Molewijk B, Abma T. Improving care and ethics: a plea for interactive empirical ethics. Am J Bioeth 2009;9:99-101.
30. Widdershoven G, Molewijk B. Philosophical foundations of clinical ethics: a hermeneutic perspective. In: Schildmann J, Gordon J, Vollmann J, eds. Clinical ethics consultation. Theories and methods, implementation, evaluation. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2010:37-51.