Journal of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (629)348-3199

Short Communication - Journal of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing (2024) Volume 7, Issue 4

Ethical Dilemmas in Critical Care Nursing: Navigating Complex Decisions

David Thompson *

Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Sydney, Australia

*Corresponding Author:
David Thompson
Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Sydney, Australia
E-mail: davivt@yahoo.com

Received: 03-Aug-2024, Manuscript No. AAICCN-24-143488; Editor assigned: 05- Aug-2024, PreQC No. AAICCN-24-143488 (PQ); Reviewed:19- Aug-2024,QC No. AAICCN-24-143488; Revised:21- Aug-2024, Manuscript No. AAICCN-24-143488 (R); Published: 28- Aug-2024, DOI:10.35841/aaiccn-7.4.221

Citation: Thompson D. Ethical Dilemmas in Critical Care Nursing: Navigating Complex Decisions. J Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2024; 7(4):221

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing

Introduction

Critical care nursing is a field characterized by intense, often life-and-death situations where nurses frequently encounter complex ethical dilemmas. These situations demand not only clinical expertise but also profound moral and ethical judgments. Nurses in critical care settings must navigate challenging decisions that impact patient outcomes, family dynamics, and the broader healthcare environment. This article explores some of the key ethical dilemmas faced by critical care nurses and provides insights into navigating these complex decisions with integrity and compassion [1].

The nature of ethical dilemmas in critical care

Ethical dilemmas in critical care nursing often arise from the intersection of medical uncertainties, patient autonomy, and family expectations.

Critical care nurses frequently confront decisions related to end-of-life care, including the initiation or withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. These decisions involve assessing the patient's prognosis, understanding their wishes, and balancing the benefits and burdens of continued intervention. Respecting patient autonomy while determining what is in their best interest can be challenging, especially when patients are unable to communicate their preferences. Nurses must navigate situations where patient wishes may conflict with medical recommendations or family desires [2,3].

In times of scarcity, such as during a pandemic or major disaster, critical care nurses may face ethical dilemmas regarding the allocation of limited resources, such as ventilators or ICU beds. These decisions involve weighing the needs of individual patients against the needs of the broader population. Family members may have conflicting views about the appropriate course of treatment, leading to ethical dilemmas for nurses who must mediate between medical recommendations and family expectations. Determining when care becomes futile—that is, when it no longer provides benefit or aligns with the patient’s goals—can be an ethical challenge. Nurses must assess whether continued interventions are in line with the patient’s values and desired outcomes.

Key ethical dilemmas and case studies

Mr. Thompson, a 72-year-old man with advanced cancer, is admitted to the ICU with severe respiratory distress. The medical team believes that aggressive interventions may prolong his life but will not significantly improve his quality of life. Mr. Thompson has previously expressed a desire to avoid extreme measures but is now unable to communicate his wishes [4,5].

The nursing team faces the challenge of honoring Mr. Thompson’s previously expressed wishes while addressing the immediate demands of his critical condition. This case, nurses should consult with the patient’s family and the healthcare team to clarify Mr. Thompson’s values and preferences. Involving an ethics committee or palliative care specialist may also provide guidance on aligning care with the patient’s goals. Ms. Garcia, a 45-year-old woman with severe sepsis, requests to discontinue all medical treatments and return home despite medical advice indicating that treatment is necessary for survival. Her family is divided, with some supporting her decision and others urging the continuation of aggressive care. Nurses must balance Ms. Garcia’s autonomy with their professional obligation to provide care that they believe is in her best interest. How should they approach her request in light of conflicting opinions from her family and healthcare team? Nurses should engage in open and empathetic discussions with Ms. Garcia to understand her reasoning and ensure that her decision is informed and voluntary. They must also consider the potential impact of her decision on her family and the ethical implications of honoring her wishes.

Resource allocation: The Case of triage during a pandemic

During a severe pandemic, the ICU is overwhelmed with patients, and there are not enough ventilators to meet the demand. The nursing team is tasked with making decisions about who receives a ventilator and who does not. Nurses must make difficult decisions about allocating limited resources in a way that is fair and ethical. Should they prioritize patients based on their likelihood of survival, age, or other factors? Establishing clear, transparent criteria for triage is essential. Nurses should work with the healthcare team and ethics committees to develop and apply these criteria consistently. It’s also important to communicate decisions clearly and compassionately to patients and their families [6,7].

Strategies for navigating ethical dilemmas

Many hospitals have ethics committees that provide guidance on complex ethical issues. Nurses can seek input from these committees to ensure that decisions are made with consideration of ethical principles and institutional policies. Encouraging patients to complete advance directives and discuss their wishes with their families can help guide decision-making in critical situations. Nurses should review and respect these documents when making ethical decisions. Collaborating with other healthcare professionals, including physicians, social workers, and chaplains, can provide a comprehensive perspective on ethical dilemmas. This team approach ensures that multiple viewpoints are considered. Effective communication with patients and their families is crucial in addressing ethical dilemmas. Nurses should use empathy and clarity to discuss difficult topics, provide information, and support patients and families in making informed decisions. Nurses should engage in self-reflection and seek support from colleagues or mental health professionals to process their own emotional responses to ethical dilemmas. This self-care is important for maintaining their well-being and professional effectiveness [8-10].

Conclusion

Ethical dilemmas in critical care nursing are complex and multifaceted, requiring nurses to balance competing values and interests while providing compassionate care. By navigating these dilemmas with a focus on patient-centered care, clear communication, and collaboration with interdisciplinary teams, nurses can address ethical challenges with integrity and empathy. As the field of critical care continues to evolve, ongoing education and reflection on ethical practices will remain essential for ensuring that patient care is guided by the highest ethical standards.

References

  1. Elting LS, Rubenstein EB, Kurtin D, et al. Mississippi mud in the 1990s: risks and outcomes of vancomycin?associated toxicity in general oncology practice. Cancer. 1998 ;83(12):2597-607.

    2.         Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Ingram PR, Lye DC, Tambyah PA, et al. Risk factors for nephrotoxicity associated with continuous vancomycin infusion in outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62(1):168-71.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Glass L. Synchronization and rhythmic processes in physiology. Nature. 2001;410(6825):277-84.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Pagani M, Lombardi F, Malliani A. Heart rate variability: disagreement on the markers of sympathetic and parasympathetic activities. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(3):951-2.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Huikuri HV, Niemela MJ, Ojala S, et al. Circadian rhythms of frequency domain measures of heart rate variability in healthy subjects and patients with coronary artery disease. Effects of arousal and upright posture. Circulation. 1994;90(1):121-6.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Rozanski A, Blumenthal JA, Kaplan J. Impact of psychological factors on the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease and implications for therapy. Circulation. 1999;99(16):2192-217.

    7. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Schulz S, Laessle RG. Stress-induced laboratory eating behavior in obese women with binge eating disorder. Appetite. 2012;58(2):457-61.

    8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Baue AE, Chaudry IH. Prevention of multiple systems failure. Surg Clin North Am. 1980;60(5):1167-78.

    9.       Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Goris RJ, Gimbrere JS, Van Niekerk JL, et al. Early osteosynthesis and prophylactic mechanical ventilation in the multitrauma patient. J Trauma. 1982;22(11):895-903.

    10.        Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. Ranieri VM, Suter PM, Tortorella C, et al. Effect of mechanical ventilation on inflammatory mediators in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Trial.1999;282(1):54-61.

    11.        Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App