Dever ético e legal do anestesiologista frente ao paciente testemunha de Jeová: protocolo de atendimento

ResumoJustificativa e objetivosOs pacientes testemunhas de Jeová recusam transfusão sanguínea por motivos religiosos. O anestesiologista deve dominar conhecimentos jurídicos específicos para atender esses pacientes. Entender como o direito e o Conselho Federal de Medicina tratam essa questão é fundamental para saber agir dentro desse contexto. O objetivo deste artigo foi estabelecer um protocolo de atendimento do paciente testemunha de Jeová com ênfase no dever ético e legal do anestesiologista.ConteúdoO artigo analisa a Constituição, o Código Penal, resoluções do Conselho Federal de Medicina (CFM), pareceres e jurisprudência para entender os limites do conflito entre a autonomia de vontade da testemunha de Jeová em recusar transfusão e a obrigação do médico em transfundir. Baseado nessas evidências um protocolo de atendimento é sugerido.ConclusõesA resolução do CFM 1021/1980, o Código Penal no artigo 135, que classifica como crime a omissão de socorro, e a decisão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça sobre o processo HC 268.459/SP impõem ao médico a obrigação de transfusão quando houver risco de vida. Não é necessário concordância do paciente ou de seu responsável, pois não é proibida a manifestação de vontade do paciente testemunha de Jeová ao recusar transfusão sanguínea para si e seus dependentes, mesmo em emergências.AbstractBackground and objectivesJehovah's Witnesses patients refuse blood transfusions for religious reasons. Anesthesiologists must master specific legal knowledge to provide care to these patients. Understanding how the Law and the Federal Council of Medicine treat this issue is critical to know how to act in this context. The aim of this paper was to establish a treatment protocol for the Jehovah's Witness patient with emphasis on ethical and legal duty of the anesthesiologist.ContentThe article analyzes the Constitution, Criminal Code, resolutions of the Federal Council of Medicine (FCM), opinions, and jurisprudence to understand the limits of the conflict between the autonomy of will of Jehovah's Witnesses to refuse transfusion and the physician's duty to provide the transfusion. Based on this evidence, a care protocol is suggested.ConclusionsThe FCM resolution 1021/1980, the penal code Article 135, which classifies denial of care as a crime and the Supreme Court decision on the HC 268,459/SP process imposes on the physician the obligation of blood transfusion when life is threatened. The patient's or guardian's consent is not necessary, as the autonomy of will manifestation of the Jehovah's Witness patient refusing blood transfusion for himself and relatives, even in emergencies, is no not forbidden

Ethical and legal duty of anesthesiologists regarding Jehovah's Witness patient: care protocol

Abstract Background and objectives: Jehovah's Witnesses patients refuse blood transfusions for religious reasons. Anesthesiologists must master specific legal knowledge to provide care to these patients. Understanding how the Law and the Federal Council of Medicine treat this issue is critical to know how to act in this context. The aim of this paper was to establish a treatment protocol for the Jehovah's Witness patient with emphasis on ethical and legal duty of the anesthesiologist. Content: The article analyzes the Constitution, Criminal Code, resolutions of the Federal Council of Medicine, opinions, and jurisprudence to understand the limits of the conflict between the autonomy of will of Jehovah's Witnesses to refuse transfusion and the physician's duty to provide the transfusion. Based on this evidence, a care protocol is suggested. Conclusions: The Federal Council of Medicine resolution 1021/1980, the penal code Article 135, which classifies denial of care as a crime and the Supreme Court decision on the HC 268,459/SP process imposes on the physician the obligation of blood transfusion when life is threatened. The patient's or guardian's consent is not necessary, as the autonomy of will manifestation of the Jehovah's Witness patient refusing blood transfusion for himself and relatives, even in emergencies, is no not forbidden

Ethical and legal duty of anesthesiologists regarding Jehovah's Witness patient: care protocol

Abstract Background and objectives: Jehovah's Witnesses patients refuse blood transfusions for religious reasons. Anesthesiologists must master specific legal knowledge to provide care to these patients. Understanding how the Law and the Federal Council of Medicine treat this issue is critical to know how to act in this context. The aim of this paper was to establish a treatment protocol for the Jehovah's Witness patient with emphasis on ethical and legal duty of the anesthesiologist. Content: The article analyzes the Constitution, Criminal Code, resolutions of the Federal Council of Medicine, opinions, and jurisprudence to understand the limits of the conflict between the autonomy of will of Jehovah's Witnesses to refuse transfusion and the physician's duty to provide the transfusion. Based on this evidence, a care protocol is suggested. Conclusions: The Federal Council of Medicine resolution 1021/1980, the penal code Article 135, which classifies denial of care as a crime and the Supreme Court decision on the HC 268,459/SP process imposes on the physician the obligation of blood transfusion when life is threatened. The patient's or guardian's consent is not necessary, as the autonomy of will manifestation of the Jehovah's Witness patient refusing blood transfusion for himself and relatives, even in emergencies, is no not forbidden

Risk of Hemorrhage during Needle-Based Ophthalmic Regional Anesthesia in Patients Taking Antithrombotics: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND:Patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery are usually elderly and, due to systemic disease, may be on long-term therapy, such as antithrombotic agents. Rates of hemorrhagic complications associated with invasive procedures may be increased by the use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. OBJECTIVE:To compare the incidence of hemorrhagic complications in patients undergoing needle-based ophthalmic regional anesthesia between patients on antithrombotic therapy and those not on such therapy. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted by two independent reviewers based on searches of Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the "gray" literature (Google Scholar). The end search date was May 8, 2015, across all databases. RESULTS:Five studies met the eligibility criteria. In three studies, individual risk of bias was low, and in two of them, moderate. In all studies, no differences regarding mild to moderate incidence of hemorrhagic complications were found between patients using antithrombotics (aspirin, clopidogrel, and warfarin) and those not using them. Rates of severe hemorrhagic complication were very low (0.04%) in both groups, supporting the safety of needle blocks, even in patients using antithrombotics. High heterogeneity across studies prevented meta-analysis. Limitations to these results include low statistical power in three experimental studies and a large 95% confidence interval in the two retrospective cohorts. CONCLUSION:In this review, none of the selected studies showed significant bleeding related to needle-based ophthalmic regional anesthesia in association with the use of aspirin, clopidogrel, or vitamin K inhibitors. Since the available data is not powerful enough to provide a reliable evaluation of the true effect of antithrombotics in this setting, new studies to address these limitations are necessary

Patient pain during intravitreal injections under topical anesthesia: a systematic review

Abstract Background Intravitreal injection (IVI) is a very common vitreoretinal procedure, and multiple injections are often required per patient. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of various local anesthetic techniques in reducing pain during injection. Methods A systematic review was conducted based on searches of Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the gray literature (Google Scholar). The end search date was February 19, 2016, across all databases. We classified pain by converting visual analog scale (VAS) scores (0–100 mm) into Jensen’s classification levels: 0–4, no pain; 5–44, mild pain; 45–74, moderate pain; and 75–100, severe pain. An intervention was considered clinically significant when pain score change was >12 mm on a 100-mm scale. Results Eight studies out of 23 met the eligibility criteria. The total number of patients was 847. Most studies (5/8 [62.5%]) were at unclear risk of bias because of unclear randomization, thus providing only moderate evidence to this review. The anesthetic techniques included eye drops with proparacaine, tetracaine or cocaine, a lidocaine pledget or gel, and subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine or 0.75% levobupivacaine. No study comprised all of the techniques. Pain was mild (VAS scores, 5–44 mm) regardless of anesthetic technique. A clinically significant intervention (pain score change >12 mm) was found for only one study comparing proparacaine drops, lidocaine gel, and subconjunctival lidocaine; in that study, a subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine provided the greatest pain reduction. A meta-analysis was not possible due to study heterogeneity. Conclusions Patient pain during IVI under topical anesthesia is mild regardless of anesthetic technique. A subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine could be an option for highly sensitive patients. However, with moderate level of evidence, no single anesthetic technique could be defined as the best option for IVI

Flow diagram of literature search and selection criteria.

<p>Flow diagram of literature search and selection criteria.</p