• Louise Denholm, Aashray Lal, Mark Henderson, and Paul McConnell.
• Intensive Care SpR.
• Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2020 Apr 1; 33 (2): 211-217.

Purpose Of ReviewThis review aims to surmise a bioethical approach to the phenomenon of cancelling patient operations. There is increasing public and political interest in the matter with a rise in the frequency of cancellations. Cancellations are emotional for patients and are difficult clinical decisions.Recent FindingsReasons for cancellation involve patient factors and resource allocation applying to elective and emergency surgery. The four pillars of bioethics are easily applied, (autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice), although their failings are becoming more prominent with the rise of more encompassing virtue ethics. These include dignity, solidarity, phronesis and trust. Importantly patient dignity should be preserved, this complimenting solidarity and trust in specialist knowledge more than autonomy does. Beauchamp and Childress have provided a descriptive framework describing futility, which may aid communication and mental clarity when deliberating if it is the right choice to cancel. With regards to resource factors, ideally managerial staff should be involved in these decisions leaving the physician to be the patient's clinical advocate.SummaryAlthough cancellations are undesirable, they are inevitable and form part of the duties of a doctor. When they do occur, care must remain patient-centred, asking how we can improve this situation.

6 keywords...

hide…