![]() ![]() Non-maleficence is maintained through using enhanced screening protocols and modifying surgical techniques to reduce risks to patients and clinicians. Additionally, the potential harms of performing non-urgent surgeries extend beyond the patient. ![]() An improved algorithm can address these issues of beneficence by weighing local pandemic stressors within predictive algorithms to appropriately increase surgeries. Postponement of these surgeries can cause cumulative harm downstream. This paper’s analysis shows that non-urgent surgeries treat conditions that can become urgent if left untreated. This review hypothesizes that a more equitable decision-making algorithm can be formulated by analyzing the ethical dilemmas of elective surgical care during the pandemic through the lens of these four pillars. The objective of this review is to discuss the ethics of elective surgery cancellation during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy. ![]() However, implications of non-urgent surgery postponement during the COVID-19 pandemic have not yet been analyzed within the context of the four pillars of medical ethics. Existing literature explores the complexities of rationing medical care. At the time of writing of this article, there have been over 110 million cases and 2.4 million deaths worldwide since the start of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, postponing millions of non-urgent surgeries. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |