Cesarean section is a very effective protective measure for mother and fetus, as it could solve obstructed labor and some cases requiring timely delivery. Spinal or epidural anesthesia does not require intubation and could effectively reduce the risk of aspiration of gastric contents, which is considered to be the best anesthesia for cesarean section. However, in special situations such as fetal distress, general anesthesia is often adopted by anesthesiologists because of its quick and powerful effect. Adverse effects of general anesthesia include reflux, aspiration, postoperative nausea and vomiting, hypoxemia and insufficient ventilation, which are not good for the mother and the fetus. Before signing the consent form, the anesthesiologist should explain the advantages and risks of each type of anesthesia to the mother and her family. However, in the case of emergency cesarean section to buy time for the operation, anesthesiologists may adopt paternalistic style and tandemly explain the risks of anesthesia to the puerperal, thus ignoring the informed consent and decision-making rights of the puerperal and her family members. It is a challenge for anesthesiologists to ensure maternal autonomy while ensuring the safety of the mother and fetus. This paper discusses the thinking mode and key points of anesthesiologists and nurses in the course of anesthesiologists' and nurses' roles in order to avoid violating ethics in practice.
| Published in | International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine (Volume 10, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14 |
| Page(s) | 24-27 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Consent Process, Emergency Caesarean Section, Anesthesia
| [1] | Hemanth Kumar V, Jahagirdar S, Athiraman U, et al. Study of patient satisfaction and self-expressed problems after emergency caesarean delivery under subarachnoid block [J]. Indian Journal of Anesthesia, 2014, 58 (2): 149. |
| [2] | Kim W H, Hur M, Park S-K, et al. Comparison between general, spinal, epidural, and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a network meta-analysis [J]. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia, 2019, 37: 5–15. |
| [3] | Urfalıoglu A, Öksüz G, Bilal B, et al. Retrospective Evaluation of Anesthetic Management in Cesarean Sections of Pregnant Women with Placental Anomaly [J]. Anesthesiology Research and Practice, 2020, 2020: 1–5. |
| [4] | Ratnayake G, Patil V. General anesthesia during caesarean sections: implications for the mother, fetus, anesthetist and obstetrician [J]. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 31 (6): 393–402. |
| [5] | Iddrisu M, Khan Z H. Anesthesia for cesarean delivery: general or regional anesthesia—a systematic review [J]. Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology, 2021, 13 (1): 1. |
| [6] | Dunn M, Fulford K W M, Herring J, et al. Between the Reasonable and the Particular: Deflating Autonomy in the Legal Regulation of Informed Consent to Medical Treatment [J]. Health Care Analysis, 2019, 27 (2): 110–127. |
| [7] | Fullbrook S. Consent: the issue of rights and responsibilities for the health woricer [J]: 3. |
| [8] | Chan, S. W., Tulloch, E., Cooper, E. S., Smith, A., Wojcik, W., Norman, J. E. Montgomery and informed consent: where are we now? [J]. BMJ, 2017, 35 (7): 22–24. |
| [9] | Stohl H. Childbirth Is Not a Medical Emergency: Maternal Right to Informed Consent throughout Labor and Delivery [J]. Journal of Legal Medicine, 2018, 38 (3–4): 329–353. |
| [10] | Thompson R, Miller Y D. Birth control: to what extent do women report being informed and involved in decisions about pregnancy and birth procedures? [J]. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2014, 14 (1): 62. |
| [11] | Liaschenko J, Peter E. Fostering Nurses’ Moral Agency and Moral Identity: The Importance of Moral Community [J]. Hastings Center Report, 2016, 46: S18–S21. |
| [12] | Lee E, Kim Y. The relationship of moral sensitivity and patient safety attitudes with nursing students’ perceptions of disclosure of patient safety incidents: A cross-sectional study [J]. T. Schultz. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (1): e0227585. |
| [13] | Jameton A. What Moral Distress in Nursing History Could Suggest about the Future of Health Care [J]. AMA Journal of Ethics, 2017, 19 (6): 617–628. |
| [14] | Bayable S D, Ahmed S A, Lema G F, et al. Assessment of Maternal Satisfaction and Associated Factors among Parturients Who Underwent Cesarean Delivery under Spinal Anesthesia at University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia, 2019 [J]. R. G. Pearl. Anesthesiology Research and Practice, 2020, 2020: 1–8. |
| [15] | Raines, D. A. Moral Agency in Nursing [J]. Nursing Forum, 1994, 29 (1): 5–11. |
| [16] | Weber E. Moral Distress, Workplace Health, and Intrinsic Harm: Moral Distress, Workplace Health, and Intrinsic Harm [J]. Bioethics, 2016, 30 (4): 244–250. |
| [17] | Paley J. Cognition and the compassion deficit: the social psychology of helping behavior in nursing: Cognition and the Compassion Deficit [J]. Nursing Philosophy, 2014, 15 (4): 274–287. |
| [18] | Soares S, Camponogara S, Vargas M. What is said and unspoken about the autonomy of a nurse: (dis) continuity in discourses. [J]. Rev Bras Enferm., 2020, 7 (36). |
| [19] | McDermott-Levy R, Leffers J, Mayaka J. Ethical Principles and Guidelines of Global Health Nursing Practice [J]. Nursing Outlook, 2018, 66 (5): 473–481. |
| [20] | Friedrich O, Hemmerling K, Kuehlmeyer K, et al. Principle-based structured case discussions: do they foster moral competence in medical students? - A pilot study [J]. BMC Medical Ethics, 2017, 18 (1): 21. |
| [21] | Callan J E, Callan M E. An Historical Overview of Basic Approaches and Issues in Ethical and Moral Philosophy and Principles: A Foundation for Understanding Ethics in Psychology [J]. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 2005, 11 (1–2): 11–26. |
| [22] | Snelling P C. The metaethics of nursing codes of ethics and conduct [J]. Nursing Philosophy, 2016. |
| [23] | Kangasniemi M., Viitalahde K. and Porkka S. A theoretical examination of the rights of nurses [J]. Nursing Ethics, 2010, 17 (5): 628–635. |
| [24] | Murgic L, Hébert P C, Sovic S, et al. Paternalism and autonomy: views of patients and providers in a transitional (post-communist) country [J]. BMC Medical Ethics, 2015, 16 (1): 65. |
| [25] | Fountouki A, Sanchez M A, Theofanidis D. Paternalism VS Patient Empowerment: Nursing Challenges from Spain and Greece [J]: 7. |
| [26] | Komrad MS. A defence of medical paternalism: maximizing patients’ autonomy [J]. Journal of law medicine & ethics, 1983, 9 (1): 38–44. |
| [27] | Vyshka G, Kruja J. Inapplicability of advance directives in a paternalistic setting: the case of a post-communist health system. [J]. BMC Medical Ethics, 2011, 12 (8): 12–14. |
APA Style
Chulei Ji, Guanghao Zhang, Ru Yu, Ya Su, Xianjie Zhang. (2022). Examining the Consent Process for Anesthesia in Emergency Caesarean Section. International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine, 10(1), 24-27. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14
ACS Style
Chulei Ji; Guanghao Zhang; Ru Yu; Ya Su; Xianjie Zhang. Examining the Consent Process for Anesthesia in Emergency Caesarean Section. Int. J. Anesth. Clin. Med. 2022, 10(1), 24-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14,
author = {Chulei Ji and Guanghao Zhang and Ru Yu and Ya Su and Xianjie Zhang},
title = {Examining the Consent Process for Anesthesia in Emergency Caesarean Section},
journal = {International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
pages = {24-27},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijacm.20221001.14},
abstract = {Cesarean section is a very effective protective measure for mother and fetus, as it could solve obstructed labor and some cases requiring timely delivery. Spinal or epidural anesthesia does not require intubation and could effectively reduce the risk of aspiration of gastric contents, which is considered to be the best anesthesia for cesarean section. However, in special situations such as fetal distress, general anesthesia is often adopted by anesthesiologists because of its quick and powerful effect. Adverse effects of general anesthesia include reflux, aspiration, postoperative nausea and vomiting, hypoxemia and insufficient ventilation, which are not good for the mother and the fetus. Before signing the consent form, the anesthesiologist should explain the advantages and risks of each type of anesthesia to the mother and her family. However, in the case of emergency cesarean section to buy time for the operation, anesthesiologists may adopt paternalistic style and tandemly explain the risks of anesthesia to the puerperal, thus ignoring the informed consent and decision-making rights of the puerperal and her family members. It is a challenge for anesthesiologists to ensure maternal autonomy while ensuring the safety of the mother and fetus. This paper discusses the thinking mode and key points of anesthesiologists and nurses in the course of anesthesiologists' and nurses' roles in order to avoid violating ethics in practice.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Examining the Consent Process for Anesthesia in Emergency Caesarean Section AU - Chulei Ji AU - Guanghao Zhang AU - Ru Yu AU - Ya Su AU - Xianjie Zhang Y1 - 2022/04/28 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14 DO - 10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14 T2 - International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine JF - International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine JO - International Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Medicine SP - 24 EP - 27 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2997-2698 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijacm.20221001.14 AB - Cesarean section is a very effective protective measure for mother and fetus, as it could solve obstructed labor and some cases requiring timely delivery. Spinal or epidural anesthesia does not require intubation and could effectively reduce the risk of aspiration of gastric contents, which is considered to be the best anesthesia for cesarean section. However, in special situations such as fetal distress, general anesthesia is often adopted by anesthesiologists because of its quick and powerful effect. Adverse effects of general anesthesia include reflux, aspiration, postoperative nausea and vomiting, hypoxemia and insufficient ventilation, which are not good for the mother and the fetus. Before signing the consent form, the anesthesiologist should explain the advantages and risks of each type of anesthesia to the mother and her family. However, in the case of emergency cesarean section to buy time for the operation, anesthesiologists may adopt paternalistic style and tandemly explain the risks of anesthesia to the puerperal, thus ignoring the informed consent and decision-making rights of the puerperal and her family members. It is a challenge for anesthesiologists to ensure maternal autonomy while ensuring the safety of the mother and fetus. This paper discusses the thinking mode and key points of anesthesiologists and nurses in the course of anesthesiologists' and nurses' roles in order to avoid violating ethics in practice. VL - 10 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: