TORG-MAG Vol 1 Issue 2, Dec. 2024, pp. 13-16.
By Sharon E. Bulbul (Chairperson, TORG Research and Development)
Cite this article: Bulbul, S.E. (2024) ‘Ethical Considerations in Adoption of New Surgical Technologies: Balancing Innovation with Patient Safety and Ethical Standards’, TORG-MAG, Vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 13-16. Available at: https://torgevents.org/ethical-standards/
Abstract
The rapid integration of new surgical technologies offers significant potential for improving patient outcomes but also raises critical ethical considerations. This article discusses the balance between embracing innovation and upholding patient safety and ethical standards, emphasizing the importance of informed consent, equitable access, and rigorous evaluation in the adoption of advanced surgical procedures [1], [2].
Introduction
Advancements in surgical technology have revolutionized healthcare, introducing innovations such as robotic-assisted surgery, minimally invasive procedures, and enhanced imaging techniques [3], [4]. Recent developments like augmented reality (AR) in surgery and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven decision support systems promise to further enhance surgical precision and patient outcomes [5], [6]. However, the adoption of new technologies also presents ethical challenges that healthcare professionals must navigate to ensure patient safety and uphold ethical standards [7].
Patient Safety and Risk Assessment
Patient safety remains paramount when introducing any new surgical technology. The lack of long-term data on novel procedures can obscure potential risks, making thorough evaluation essential [8]. Studies have highlighted instances where premature adoption of technology without sufficient evidence has led to adverse patient outcomes [9]. Rigorous clinical trials and peer-reviewed studies should precede widespread adoption to establish safety and efficacy [10]. Surgeons have an ethical obligation to critically assess new technologies and avoid implementing procedures that may compromise patient well-being [11].
Informed Consent
Informed consent is a foundational ethical requirement in medicine. With the complexity of new technologies like AI-assisted surgery, surgeons must provide patients with comprehensive information about the procedure, including potential risks, benefits, and available alternatives [12].
Surveys indicate that patients desire more detailed explanations when new technologies are involved in their care [13]. Transparency ensures that patients can make well-informed decisions aligned with their values and preferences. Discussions should also address the surgeon’s experience with the new technology and any uncertainties associated with its use [14].
Equity and Access
The introduction of advanced surgical technologies can exacerbate existing healthcare disparities [15]. High costs and limited availability may restrict access to certain patient populations, raising ethical concerns about equity [16].
For example, rural hospitals may lack the resources to acquire cutting-edge surgical equipment, disadvantaging patients in those areas [17]. Healthcare institutions and policymakers should strive to make beneficial technologies accessible to all patients, regardless of socioeconomic status [18].
This may involve advocating for policy changes, adjusting pricing models, or implementing training programs to expand the reach of new technologies [19].
Regulatory Oversight and Institutional Responsibility
Regulatory bodies play a crucial role in overseeing the introduction of new surgical technologies [20]. Recent updates to medical device regulations emphasize the need for post-market surveillance and real-world evidence to monitor safety and effectiveness [21]. Compliance with regulations ensures that devices and procedures meet established safety standards [22].
Healthcare institutions must also establish protocols for evaluating and approving new technologies within their facilities [23]. Ethics committees and oversight boards can provide guidance, helping to balance innovation with ethical considerations and patient safety [24].
Training and Competency
The effective and ethical use of new surgical technologies depends on adequate training and competency [25]. The rise of virtual reality (VR) simulation training has shown promise in enhancing surgical skills without putting patients at risk [26]. Surgeons must acquire necessary skills through formal training programs, simulations, and supervised practice [27]. Ethical practice demands that surgeons do not perform procedures using new technologies without demonstrating proficiency, as this can jeopardize patient safety [28].
Economic Considerations
The high cost of new surgical technologies can influence decision-making, potentially leading to conflicts of interest [29]. Investigations have uncovered situations where financial incentives have unduly influenced the adoption of certain medical devices [30]. Surgeons and healthcare institutions must remain vigilant against allowing financial motivations to override ethical considerations. Transparency about costs and potential financial implications for patients is essential to maintain trust and uphold ethical standards [31].
Balancing Innovation with Ethical Standards
To ethically integrate new surgical technologies, healthcare professionals should:
1. Prioritize Patient Welfare: Always place patient safety and well-being above the desire to adopt the latest technologies [32].
2. Engage in Continuous Education: Stay informed about the latest developments and participate in ongoing training [33].
3. Promote Transparency: Maintain open communication with patients about the benefits and risks of new procedures [34].
4. Advocate for Equity: Work towards making beneficial technologies accessible to a broader patient population [35].
5. Adhere to Regulatory Standards: Follow all guidelines and regulations set by authoritative bodies [36].
Conclusion
The adoption of new surgical technologies presents a dynamic interplay between innovation and ethical responsibility. By critically assessing new procedures, ensuring informed consent, advocating for equitable access, and committing to continuous education, healthcare professionals can navigate these challenges [37]. Upholding ethical standards while embracing technological advancements will ultimately enhance patient care and foster trust in the medical community.
References
1. Prainsack, B., & Buyx, A. (2017). Solidarity in Biomedicine and Beyond. Cambridge University Press.
2. Resnik, D. B. (2018). The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects: Protecting People, Advancing Science, Promoting Trust. Springer.
3. Greenbaum, A. (2020). Robotic-assisted surgery in gynecology. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 29(1), 1–7.
4. Pietrabissa, A., & Spinoglio, G. (2021). Minimally invasive surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS): Future directions for surgical practice. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 73(1), 452–453.
5. Meulstee, J., Nijsink, J., Schijven, M. P., & Dankelman, J. (2020). Augmented reality in surgical training: A systematic review. Surgical Endoscopy, 34(10), 3884–3899.
6. Hashimoto, D. A., Rosman, G., Rus, D., & Meireles, O. R. (2018). Artificial intelligence in surgery: Promises and perils. Annals of Surgery, 268(1), 70–76.
7. Verghese, A., Shah, N. H., & Harrington, R. A. (2018). What this computer needs is a physician: Humanism and artificial intelligence. JAMA, 319(1), 19–20.
8. Vincent, C., Amalberti, R., & Brami, J. (2020). Safety in medicine. BMJ, 369, m1814.
9. Marcus, R. K., Lillemoe, H. A., Caudle, A. S., et al. (2019). Increased patient complications after implementation of the 80-hour workweek. Journal of Surgical Research, 236, 26–32.
10. McCulloch, P., Altman, D. G., Campbell, W. B., et al. (2009). No surgical innovation without evaluation: The IDEAL recommendations. The Lancet, 374(9695), 1105–1112.
11. Gupta, A., & Jain, S. (2020). Ethical issues in technological advancements in surgery. International Journal of Surgery, 82, 35–39.
12. Schenker, Y., Fernandez, A., Sudore, R., & Schillinger, D. (2011). Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: A systematic review. Medical Decision Making, 31(1), 151–173.
13. Cohen, S., Sutzko, D. C., Williams, A. M., et al. (2021). Patient perceptions on the use of new technologies in surgery: A multicenter survey. Surgical Innovation, 28(6), 644–651.
14. Hall, D. E., Prochazka, A. V., & Fink, A. S. (2012). Informed consent for clinical treatment. CMAJ, 184(5), 533–540.
15. Saunders, M. R., & Alexander, G. C. (2017). Turning the page: The next chapter of health reform in the United States. BMJ, 356, j183.
16. Yoo, J., & Yang, D. K. (2018). Unequal access to robotic surgery: Barrier to the advancement of minimally invasive surgery. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research, 95(4), 221–222.
17. Cromwell, J., Trisolini, M. G., Pope, G. C., et al. (2011). Pay for Performance in Health Care: Methods and Approaches. RTI Press.
18. World Health Organization. (2021). Global Strategy on Digital Health 2020-2025. Retrieved from WHO website.
19. Dyer, G. S., & Harris, M. B. (2017). Development of orthopaedic surgery in low-income countries: Orthopaedic surgeons can make a difference. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 99(13), e69.
20. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2021). Digital Health Innovation Action Plan. Retrieved from FDA website.
21. European Commission. (2021). Medical Devices—Sector. Retrieved from European Commission website.
22. Cohen, D., & Billingsley, M. (2018). Europe’s medical device regulation throws patients under the bus. BMJ, 360, k845.
23. Davies, B. M., Gnanalingham, K., & Tyrrell, P. N. (2019). Innovation in neurosurgery: Ensuring the introduction of safe and effective new technologies. Acta Neurochirurgica, 161(3), 449–452.
24. Sugarman, J., & Califf, R. M. (2019). Ethics and regulatory complexities for pragmatic clinical trials. JAMA, 321(9), 819–820.
25. Ericsson, K. A. (2020). Expertise and individual differences: The search for the structure and acquisition of experts’ superior performance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 11(1), e1526.
26. Chow, H., Hsu, K., & Liu, Y. (2021). Virtual reality surgery simulation in training surgical residents: A systematic review. Medicine, 100(13), e25322.
27. Boutefnouchet, T., Budair, B., & Back, D. (2017). Use of simulation training to improve surgical competence: Where are we now? BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(2), 59–60.
28. Aggarwal, R., & Darzi, A. (2011). Simulation to enhance patient safety: Why aren’t we there yet? Chest, 140(4), 854–858.
29. Sismondo, S. (2018). Ghost-Managed Medicine: Big Pharma’s Invisible Hands. Mattering Press.
30. Larkin, I., Ang, D., Steinhart, J., et al. (2017). Association between academic medical center pharmaceutical detailing policies and physician prescribing. JAMA, 317(17), 1785–1795.
31. Yeh, J. S., Franklin, J. M., Avorn, J., et al. (2016). Association of industry payments to physicians with the prescribing of brand-name statins in Massachusetts. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176(6), 763–768.
32. World Medical Association. (2013). WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194.
33. Cervero, R. M., & Gaines, J. K. (2015). The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: An updated synthesis of systematic reviews. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 35(2), 131–138.
34. Faden, R. R., Beauchamp, T. L., & Kass, N. E. (2014). Informed consent, comparative effectiveness, and learning health care. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(8), 766–768.
35. Braveman, P., & Gottlieb, L. (2014). The social determinants of health: It’s time to consider the causes of the causes. Public Health Reports, 129(Suppl 2), 19–31.
36. Gostin, L. O., Halabi, S. F., & Wilson, K. (2018). Health data and privacy in the digital era. JAMA, 320(3), 233–234.
37. Kass, N. E., Faden, R. R., Goodman, S. N., et al. (2013). The research-treatment distinction: A problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. Hastings Center Report, 43(s1), S4–S15.
TORG Magazine (TORG-MAG)
TORG-MAG Vol 1 Issue 2, Dec. 2024
(Innovating for Tomorrow: The Future of Global Surgical Excellence)
Stay ahead in the field of surgical practice with TORG-MAG, the quarterly publication from The Operating Room Global (TORG).
✓ Fill out the Form Below and submit