Assessing the Ethics of Medical Research in Emergency Settings: How Do International Regulations Work in Practice?

Different ethical principles conflict in research conducted in emergency research. Clinical care and its development should be based on research. Patients in critical clinical condition are in the greatest need of better medicines. The critical condition of the patient and the absence of a patient representative at the critical time period make it difficult and sometimes impossible to request an informed consent before the beginning of the trial. In an emergency, care decisions must be made in a short period of time, and the more time is wasted, the more the risk of death or severe tissue damage and incapacity increases. Consent requests take time, and so the time period before treatment might put the patient’s life in jeopardy. Not requesting consent before a trial is also contradictory. A person should not be forced to participate in a trial against his or her will. Due to the dark history of medical research previously, international declarations and conventions have set up ethical principles for medical research. They emphasize the autonomy of the research participant—or his or her legal representative—to give a free and informed consent prior to the initiation of research. In the case of a critical emergency, the unconscious state of the patient, the emotional stress of family members or the lack of time to start life-sustaining measures may often restrict the possibilities of communicating with the patient or his/her representative. Therefore, written informed consent is difficult to achieve, and its voluntariness in emergency situations is, at best, open to question. The mortality of patients is high without clinical interventions in emergency research. Random selection of patients is difficult and requires extra work from personnel in the emergency rooms. Recruitment, information and asking for consent may also take time, postpone the initiation of treatment and increase the risk of death and irreversible tissue and organ damage, and therefore be risky for the patient. It is therefore essential that the health care professionals recruiting suitable research participants are well motivated and well trained. Medical research in an emergency setting should always be regarded as an exceptional situation requiring special provisions. Only such research should be done as cannot be done in other conditions. An independent body must approve the research protocol and the ways in which the consent of the participant or proxy are to be sought. In addition, the trial must be expected to result in direct and significant benefit for the research participants. If research without prior consent is not approved, the development of emergency care is threatened. On the other hand, if prior consent is not required, a person could be recruited into a clinical trial against his or her will. Doing good and avoiding harm, and respecting the autonomy of the patient are in conflict in the context of emergency medical research. To develop better medicines for patients experiencing acute medical emergencies, research into such conditions should be allowed. Research participants should have the possibility to participate or refuse to participate in research that may benefit them and other patients. The risk of irreversible damage occurring as the consequence of time delays for seeking consent is unacceptable. A prior wish about participation in clinical trials should be respected, if known. The conditions under which medical research in emergencies can be considered acceptable can be determined and agreed upon nationally and internationally. An earlier version of this paper was presented at The 7th International Conference on Bioethics on “The Ethics of Research in Emergency Medicine”, held on June 2, 2006, Warsaw, Poland.     

非形式推理的研究及展望

非形式推理目前被界定为对结构不良的、用自然语言表述的、没有固定答案的、需要进行归纳的问题的推理,推理的结果是个体对问题形成一定的态度和观点。已有研究探讨了非形式推理的一般特征、衡量标准、影响推理的个体特征,以及学生非形式推理能力的培养方式等问题。作者认为开展非形式推理及其影响因素的研究将促进人格特征与认知关系的研究,并有广泛的教育意义,同时提出了有待深入研究的课题。     

中医药临床实践的价值

把现代病因病理医学作为参照物,通过比较,指出中医的证是病人的全身综合反应状态,是病因病理医学之外的另外一个临床医学范畴。状态与病因病理是人类疾病的两个不同方面。从单纯状态病,西医难治和不治的疾病,常见病的治疗,中医药的近期疗效和远期疗效等方面阐述了中医药的临床价值。     

医学伦理审查如何适应转化医学的要求

随着转化医学的兴起,医学伦理审查面临前所未有的机遇与挑战.如何使医学伦理审查工作更好地适应转化医学发展的需要,提高审查质量,成为亟需解决的问题.在分析当前我国医学伦理审查工作现状和主要问题的基础上,进一步探讨了可行的解决方法,如进一步明确和强化管理部门服务功能、保证伦理委员会成员多样性和重视伦理审查多视角、强化伦理委员会后续跟踪审查、规范伦理审查委员的培训与继续教育等,为我国医学伦理审查工作的规范化发展和医学伦理审查质量的进一步提高提供参考.     

肺癌治疗中辨证论治与循证医学的矛盾与统一

肺癌的个体化治疗是依托于循证医学和飞速发展的分子生物学技术开启的西医治疗的新篇章,但同时也面临着很多困境。而中医辨证论治思想在朴素哲学思想的启领下,早已体现了个体化治疗的灵魂。笔者融合辨证论治思想,现代循证医学证据,提出了肺癌中西医治疗新的概念,从个体差异的绝对性出发,论述了辨证思想与循证医学共存的必然性及两者之间的矛盾。循证医学的结论可通过对大量个体化辨证治疗的研究而不断更新,从而更好地指导辨证治疗,这是未来中西医临床肺癌诊疗的必经之路。     

大数据时代背景下的医学思考*--转化医学新趋势前瞻

作为21世纪最具活力的医学发展模式,转化医学为基础和临床构建了交流沟通的高效平台,当前正朝着多学科、多领域、多系统的方向迈进。随着信息技术与生命科学的交叉融合,生物医学已经迈入大数据时代。大数据既保证了医学实践的深度,有深度才能洞悉本质;又保证了医学实践的高度,有高度才能总揽全局。因此,大数据的出现为深陷还原论泥潭的现代医学提供了有效的解决途径。大数据浪潮对医学基础研究和医疗实践的深远影响,必将为转化医学发展带来新的发展机遇。     

心理疗法在针灸治疗中的应用

随着疾病谱和死亡谱的改变,生物医学模式逐渐地不能满足医学发展的需要,取而代之的是生物心理社会医学模式。现代医学模式全方位探求影响人类健康与疾病的因果关系,认为生物学、心理学及社会学因素是人类致病共同的重要因素。针灸是中国传统医学同时也是西方辅助与替代医学的重要内容。针灸医护人员应大力宣传针灸知识,应用生物心理社会医学模式去对待每一位患者。本文试述心理疗法如支持性心理治疗、认知行为疗法、放松疗法在针灸临床的应用,展现针灸心身同治的诊疗特点。     

临床医学教育中的医学哲学

医学哲学是现代医学教育中的重要组成部分,医学科学必须与医学哲学相结合才是未来医学教育的发展方向。在以岗位胜任能力为导向的医学教育转型中,培养医学生的哲学思维无疑是其重要环节之一。为适应全球卫生事业的迅猛发展,医学教育务必在临床思维上进行整合。本文从培养合格医学毕业生的角度出发,阐述了医学与哲学的关系、医学教育中的哲学地位及哲学在临床医学教育中的具体应用。旨在提高医学生的哲学理念,促进现代医学教育的转型发展。     

面对死亡，医学仍有责任

1998年,李嘉诚先生捐建了中国大陆第一家宁养院,为贫困的晚期癌症病人提供免费的疼痛控制,心理辅导和生命伦理的关怀。三年后,李嘉诚基金会将这一项目推向全国,创立“全国宁养医疗服务计划”,提出了“以人为本,全人服务”的服务宗旨,给国内的医疗工作开启了一个新的视野。宁养疗护以“五全照顾”充分体现了以人为本,尊重生命的医学本质。医学不仅仅是科学,它更应该是研究人的“仁”学;面对迈向死亡的末期病人,协助病人坦然面对,减少身、心、灵的痛苦,协助其放下万缘,安详往生也是我们医者的责任。     

临床整合医学的必要性及实施中存在的问题——以慢性阻塞性肺疾病及其合并症的诊治为例

近年来人们逐渐认识到慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是一种全身性疾病,即COPD不仅会影响到气道和肺,还会引起一系列合并症,包括心血管疾病、骨质疏松、焦虑和抑郁、癌症、感染、代谢综合征和糖尿病等。这些合并症会显著地影响COPD疾病严重程度和预后,因而必须对COPD进行整体防控,然而COPD的上述合并症的诊治分属不同学科,所以要做好COPD的整体防控就需要相关学科进行医学整合。