Beneficence and Nonmaleficence in Treating Neonatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Brain Injury

• The successful clinical translation of therapeutic hypothermia offers the tantalizing possibility that further improvements in outcomes may be possible by combining cooling with other neuroprotective drugs. The challenge now is to select from a daunting range of potential treatments. The patient's best interest must be central to ethical decision making at all times. However, the beneficence or nonmaleficence of potential therapies is seldom clear for any individual patient at the time of testing new therapies. Clinical randomized controlled trials are generally acknowledged by the scientific community as the 'gold standard' for evaluating interventions in health care. Therefore, ethical trial design is of the utmost importance. This paper explores contrasting ethical perspectives on how to select new interventions to treat neonatal encephalopathy after perinatal hypoxia-ischemia. (C) 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel

Ämnesord

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Medicinska och farmaceutiska grundvetenskaper -- Neurovetenskaper (hsv//swe)

MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Basic Medicine -- Neurosciences (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

Neonatal

Encephalopathy

Beneficence

Nonmaleficence

D-ASPARTATE RECEPTOR

MAGNESIUM-SULFATE

THERAPEUTIC HYPOTHERMIA

COMPETITIVE-INHIBITION

CHILDHOOD OUTCOMES

CEREBRAL-PALSY

BIRTH

ASPHYXIA

GLYCINE SITE

ENCEPHALOPATHY

XENON

Developmental Biology

Neurosciences

Publikations- och innehållstyp

ref (ämneskategori)

for (ämneskategori)