Article Sidebar
Published:
Sep 20, 2021Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publication rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Note: If you need to comply with your funding body policy, you can apply for the CC BY license after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
Main Article Content
Ethical conflicts experienced by intensive care unit health professionals in a regional hospital, Limpopo province, South Africa
Abstract
Background: Conflicts arise when healthcare providers disagree about providing optimal care to critically ill patients where resources and services are constrained.
Aim: This study investigated ethical conflicts experienced by intensive care unit (ICU) healthcare professionals working in a regional hospital, Limpopo province of South Africa.
Setting: The study was conducted at a rural public regional hospital in Vhembe district, Limpopo Province. Communities served by the hospital are poor and medically uninsured.
Methods: This study adopted a qualitative, exploratory and descriptive design. The target population comprised Health care professionals working in an ICU of the regional hospital. Purposive sample was selected and 17 unstructured interviews were conducted. Tesch’s method of data analysis was used. Ethical considerations were adhered to.
Results: Patients’ care needs were compromised because of the unavailability of beds and high-technology equipment, such as well-functioning ventilators. Doctors were not having the necessary skills required in the ICU as the majority were on community service/internship and nurses acted beyond their scope of practice because of a lack of adequately trained intensive care specialists. Infection control practices were overlooked and ‘use once’ pieces of equipment were reused. Conflicting values between nurses, patients and family of patients exist.
Conclusion: Lack of resources compromises provision of optimal and intensive care. Patients were prone to infections and their safety might have been compromised.
