Showing 13 results for saeedi tehrani
Mohamad Rafiezadeh, Mahshad Noroozi, Akram Hashemi, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 0, Issue 0 (9-2025)
Abstract
Introduction
Physicians often hesitate to disclose their errors due to fears of legal repercussions and stigma. Understanding their attitudes toward error prevention and professional behavior is essential. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of interns at Iran University of Medical Sciences regarding the disclosure of medical errors.
Materials and Methods
This cross-sectional descriptive study included all interns who entered the university in 2017. Data were collected using the Persian version of the Medical Mistakes Survey questionnaire and analyzed with SPSS software version 26.
Findings
Among the 186 participants, 66% reported committing a medical error. Only 21% fully disclosed errors with no significant adverse effects, while 31% disclosed errors with severe consequences.
Conclusion
Most interns avoid fully disclosing errors, primarily due to fears of legal action and concerns about being underestimated by patients. Further studies are needed to enhance physicians' performance and patient safety.
Amin Hassanzade Haddad, Hojjat Rastegari, Mojtaba Sedaghat, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Kiarash Aramesh,
Volume 4, Issue 1 (3-2011)
Abstract
Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani1, Mansoureh Madani,
Volume 7, Issue 6 (3-2015)
Abstract
Medical futility refers to diagnostic, treatment, and rehabilitation interventions that are unlikely to produce any positive outcome for patients. Doctors should beware of such actions due to their professional commitments. There are ambiguities in the definition of futility that have been the subject of many studies. In this paper, relevant literature was reviewed to find a definition for futility from the perspective of the four bioethical principles.Determining the futility of an action, whether it is the request of the patient, their family or service providers, is a highly sensitive matter that can lead to unethical decisions in the medical profession.Autonomy is a concept that is related to the diverse views on treatment objectives. In this paper we investigated the issues of physician and patient autonomy, and the differences between the values of the people involved. We have also discussed the concept of palliative care with an attempt to clarify the difference between this type of care and futile care, and to determine the boundaries. Another focus of our study was situations where physicians and other health care providers deliver futile treatment for various purposes. Such cases involve factors that may influence the judgment of physicians, and some of them are unethical due to incentives such as financial gain.Finally, ethical decision-making in this area is only possible through clarification of the different aspects of the issue and prioritization by experts and professionals. In order to do so, all circumstances need to be taken into account, including allocation of scarce resources within the health care system and fairness. Moreover, medical staff should have access to the necessary information so that they can make ethical decisions in different situations.
Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Mahshad Noroozi,
Volume 8, Issue 2 (7-2015)
Abstract
Nowadays, electronic communications technology propounds new forms of the patient-physician relationship in the field of medicine. Effective communication between the patient and the physician can play a crucial role in the process of treatment. This new form of communication greatly influences promotion of the health system by improving access to inexpensive and fast services regardless of geographic boundaries. In times of crisis, telemedicine plays an important role in delivering health services to deprived areas in a just manner. Usage of communications technology is inevitable, and due to the virtual nature of this kind of medical communication, recognition of certain ethical considerations seems essential. Successful examples of telemedicine are abundant throughout the world and usage of this technology is a helping solution for inadequacies in the healthcare system. In Iran, because of the geographical extent of the country, this technology can provide access to medical services in some cases.In order to achieve the best outcome in telemedicine, it is essential to respect confidentiality, privacy, informed consent and commitment to professionalism in this field.
Jannat Mashayekhi, Mansure Madani, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 8, Issue 3 (9-2015)
Abstract
According to the principle of respect for autonomy, which is one of the essential precepts of medical ethics, patients are entitled to the right of self-determination for a hypothetical future when they may lose the decision-making capacity. Thus, when still adequately competent to make decisions, a person can prepare a document and predict their therapeutic options and state their wishes for the possible time of lack of decision making capacity, or assign a surrogate who will make the best decision considering the attitudes and interests of the patient. This document, called advance directive, has advantages and disadvantages, and has been investigated from different perspectives. The present study addresses this new issue through non-systematic internet and library review of resources, and aims to investigate some aspects of this subject and examine the possibility of its naturalization from certain viewpoints, particularly from the Islamic perspective. In Islam, life is highly respected and physicians are obliged to do their best to protect human life. In cases where patients refuse the suggested treatments, even when it harms them fundamentally, the physician is obliged to respect their wishes for several reasons. Nevertheless, physicians should avoid any direct measure that may end up in the patient’s death. As regards advance directives, the patient no longer has the capacity to make decisions and has done so formerly, which may be in conflict with the physician’s responsibility to save the patient’s life under present circumstances. In such cases, despite a preliminary injunction, there is no reason to extend the patient's right to the time of their consciousness. Therefore, based on the religious principles observed in Iran, acting on the patient's previous decisions can only be valid as long as they do not conflict with the physician’s responsibilities. Furthermore, advance directives currently do not have a place in our legal system and the recognition of such documents is contingent upon further studies, including legal and cultural reviews.
Mansoure Madani, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 9, Issue 1 (5-2016)
Abstract
Moral dilemmas are among the most important challenges in medical ethics. Dilemmas can occur frequently during a physician’s career and if physicians lack the ability and skills to solve them, they may be pushed to unethical behavior. Bioethics experts have always been concerned with solving ethical dilemmas in the medical profession and facilitating physicians’ decision-making process. Therefore, they often try to find useful and practical solutions by combining the views of different schools of ethics. Designing decision-making models is part of their effort to apply ethics in medicine. It is impossible to solve dilemmas without acquiring the necessary skills, and the ability to apply a decision-making model can be part of the training process.
These models aim to facilitate ethical decision-making in the field of health care by providing various frameworks. This article aims to introduce and evaluate the popular models of ethical decision-making in medicine in the hope of helping physicians choose appropriate solutions when faced with moral challenges. By presenting the advantages of applying the model approach and offering a brief introduction to popular models, the article recommends applying the approach in analyzing and resolving ethical dilemmas. Although the models each have their advantages and disadvantages, becoming proficient in their application will facilitate ethical decision-making for physicians.
Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Alireza Parsapour, Bagher Larijani,
Volume 9, Issue 2 (8-2016)
Abstract
Genetic research was initially limited to the screening and diagnosis of known hereditary diseases. After the completion of the Human Genome Project (HGP), studies became concerned with the diagnosis and treatment of many non-communicable diseases threatening the public health. Aside from this, genetic engineering, in its new form, is also concerned with the development of recombinant medications, genetic enhancement, and genetically modified organisms and their applications. The climax of these achievements is the advent of transgenic creatures. These are organisms with a genetic makeup different from their natural one created through biotechnology. Transgenic products have become more popular in recent years, especially in agriculture and livestock sectors. At the same time, genetics and biotechnology are trying to keep pace with modern advancements. Genetic modifications have resulted in larger yields in agriculture and livestock as well as the development of new medications and vaccines. Despite the large profits that genetic engineering and transgenic organisms can bring for us, they may pose dangers in certain fields. Furthermore, there are ethical concerns about the application of these technologies.
The present study attempted to address the ethical issues in new genetic technologies and analyze them with regard to the four principles of bioethics. For this purpose, keywords were first looked up in scientific sources and the data were classified; ethical considerations were then analyzed in the light of the four principles of bioethics.
In the results section first the merits of such products for humanity and their contributions to saving the limited available resources are pointed out; subsequently, potential threats in some fields are addressed, along with considerations about the mass production and consumption of genetically engineered products, autonomy of individuals, the importance of raising awareness about the pros and cons of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and their labeling. Finally, equity is addressed, and general benefits and harms, costs and effectiveness are discussed.
Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Fatemeh Bahmani, Mina Forouzandeh, Akram Hashemi,
Volume 14, Issue 0 (3-2021)
Abstract
From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers aspired to produce an effective vaccine with appropriate efficacy and low side effects to mitigate the pandemic. It seems that vaccination is the only mean to save the world from this pandemic. In this article, we will review the ethical challenges of mass vaccination (focusing on the vaccine distribution and uptake), referring to the main principles of bioethics. Safe and standard manufacturing and passing scientific and ethical stages, as well as evaluation of efficacy and safety monitoring, are the main considerations in the production of vaccines. Justice requires that vulnerable and high-risk individuals be vaccinated sooner. Public vaccination must therefore be ethically prioritized. Individuals may for some reason resist vaccination. For example due to, the confusion caused by mass media information, public’s distrust of the medical profession, the proposed relationship between vaccination and development of certain diseases, and finally low death rate due to covid 19 in some groups, especially young and healthy individuals. However, as the disease is highly contagious and if it spreads, the death rate and hospitalization due to the disease rises sharply, and the consequences of the disease mainly affect vulnerable people, in moral decision-making, the benefits and harms of the vaccine for each person should be considered against the benefits for and harms to the society. In addition, to respect the individuals’ autonomy, cultural modalities and persuasive programs shall be considered. This article is aimed to address the ethical issues of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout while proposing practical solutions to handle them.
Mahshad Noroozi, Ehsan Shamsi Gooshki, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Fatemeh Bahmani, Mina Forouzandeh, Saeed Biroudian, Nazila Nikravan Fard, Mahshad Goharimehr, Akram Hashemi,
Volume 16, Issue 1 (3-2023)
Abstract
The research activities of developing countries have increased over the last two decades. The expansion and decentralization of ethics committees necessitates appropriate performance evaluation. In 2023, a cross-sectional study was carried out on the Iranian research ethics Committees using the checklist called "Research Ethics Committee Self-Assessment Tool". The checklist was translated into Persian and revised based on the opinions of research ethics experts and the approved “regulation of establishment, grading, and description of duties for research ethics committees”. The electronic checklist was sent to the senior members of 269 research ethics committees. After gathering the data, it was analyzed using SPSS software. The response rate was 83%. The average overall score was 152.11 ± 25.173, or 69.14% of the maximum. The two sections (including continuing review (monitoring) and committee resources received less than 50% of the average score. The 138 research ethics committee scores were excellent and 85 committees were in the good range. The findings revealed that average scores are influenced by activity years, the number of monthly meetings, the presence of an approved annual budget, an approved quality improvement program, and having specific administrative staff. Completing the self-evaluation tool can raise the National Committee authorities' awareness about the adherence of the research ethics committees to the imperative standards. It can also lead to each committee's awareness of its strengths and challenges. Revision of national regulations governing the establishment, grading, and description of committee duties and then future self-evaluation can facilitate upgrading and improving the performance of ethics committees.
Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract
Professionalism in medicine refers to adhering to principles and behaviors that uphold the dignity of patients and promote public welfare. In the digital age, maintaining these principles in cyberspace has become increasingly important, necessitating attention to ethical and legal considerations. Virtual platforms can enhance communication between doctors, patients, and the broader public, increase awareness, and facilitate educational processes. Additionally, these platforms offer opportunities for networking and the exchange of information among professionals. The rise of social media has significantly influenced professional interactions. Particularly in the post-COVID-19 era, individuals are increasingly turning to these platforms for health information. Studies reveal that the global number of internet users exceeds 3.7 billion, while in Iran, the figure surpasses 78 million. Furthermore, research highlights the significant impact of information shared by doctors on social media and other public platforms, as the public places substantial trust in this group and actively seeks accurate information from them. Ethical considerations are critical in guiding the online presence of medical professionals. This article examines professionalism in cyberspace and outlines the ethical requirements for medical professionals operating in this domain. Protecting patients' interests remains the primary obligation of professionals. Consequently, any behavior that undermines professional reputation or diminishes public trust is deemed unprofessional. Key ethical requirements for professionals in virtual spaces include:
- Respecting patient confidentiality and privacy.
- Upholding the good reputation of oneself and the medical profession.
- Avoiding defamatory behavior, rumors, or labeling.
- Demonstrating honesty in providing information.
- Acting responsibly and avoiding discriminatory attitudes.
- Refraining from disparaging the competence of other professionals in medical advertisements.
Adhering to these ethical standards is essential to maintaining public trust in the medical profession. Therefore, training, evaluating, and monitoring the behavior of professionals in cyberspace are particularly important for upholding and promoting professional and ethical standards.
Hanieh Karimi, Ali Farahmand Asil, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract
Trust between doctors and patients is a cornerstone of improved health outcomes and quality medical care. However, this trust has eroded in recent decades due to various factors. The global crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to examine and analyze changes in public trust towards the healthcare system. This narrative review explores the state of public trust in healthcare before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, analyzing the factors influencing this trust and proposing strategies for its maintenance and rebuilding. A narrative review was conducted, with information gathered from searches in reputable national and international scientific databases like PubMed, ScienceDirect, Springer, and Scopus. Relevant articles from Iranian databases such as Magiran and IranMedex were also included. The review focused on the components of trust, factors affecting it, and challenges faced by the healthcare system during the pandemic. The review revealed significant changes in the components of trust in doctor-patient relationships due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, public trust in physicians had been declining due to factors such as perceived inequities in treatment, medical errors, and unprofessional behavior by some healthcare professionals. For example, surveys indicate a decline in public trust in healthcare professionals in the United States, dropping from 73% in 1966 to 34% in 2012. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly exacerbated this decline, with many people distrusting governmental institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and media outlets perceived to be providing misleading information. A study in Poland found that 31% of respondents viewed the pandemic as an exaggerated threat, while 3% considered it entirely fictional. However, the dedicated service and transparent communication of some institutions and healthcare personnel during the COVID-19 crisis partially restored public trust. This led to the emergence of a concept known as "dual trust," where people not only trust individual physicians but also pay closer attention to the overall performance of the healthcare system and governments. Dual trust has implications not only for the quality of healthcare services but also for the success of prevention and treatment programs. The COVID-19 crisis has had a profound impact on public trust in the healthcare system. To maintain and rebuild this trust, effective measures are essential. These measures should focus on enhancing service quality, fostering scientifically informed citizens, ensuring transparent communication, and promoting positive interactions between doctors and patients.
Fatemeh Hekmatian, Akram Hashemi, Soodabeh Hoveida Manesh, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani,
Volume 17, Issue 0 (Supplement of 11th Annual Iranian Congress of Medical Ethics 2024)
Abstract
Obtaining informed consent is a fundamental ethical and legal right of participants in clinical trials. It ensures that individuals are adequately informed about the research, including its nature, potential risks and benefits, and their role in the study. This knowledge empowers participants to make informed decisions about their involvement. This study aimed to evaluate the awareness of participants regarding the information provided in informed consent forms (ICFs) for clinical trials conducted at Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) in 2020. This study evaluated the accuracy of the content of ICFs of registered clinical trials and assessed participants' understanding of the information presented. ICFs were reviewed using a ministerial checklist. Participants were subsequently contacted to assess their comprehension of key aspects of the trial as outlined in the ICF. Analysis revealed a discrepancy between the information presented in the ICFs and participants' actual understanding. Despite adequate coverage of certain aspects, such as the research nature of the interventions (98.2%) and the mention of specific benefits (92.7%), significant gaps were observed in participants' comprehension of crucial information. Notably, lower levels of understanding were observed regarding the possibility of invasive interventions (25.7%), the random assignment of participants to study groups and the potential use of placebos (44%), and the possibility of not personally benefiting from the research outcomes (44%). Additionally, only 47.7% of participants reported understanding the confidentiality of their information. These findings highlight the need for improvements in the process of obtaining informed consent. While researchers may adequately address the overall research objectives and potential benefits, crucial aspects such as the potential for invasiveness, randomization procedures, and the possibility of no direct personal benefit may not be adequately communicated to participants. Enhancing participant understanding of these critical aspects is crucial for ensuring truly informed consent and upholding ethical research practices.
Amirmahdi Taromiha, Saeedeh Saeedi Tehrani, Soodabeh Hoveidamanesh, Mahshad Noroozi,
Volume 17, Issue 1 (3-2024)
Abstract
Patient-centered care, which prioritizes patients' needs, values, and preferences, is a cornerstone of modern healthcare delivery. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of medical students at Iran University of Medical Sciences toward providing patient-centered care. This cross-sectional study included medical students in all academic degrees at Iran University of Medical Sciences. Data were collected through the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) distributed online. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS version 26. Of the 389 participants, 48.6% were male and 51.4% were female, with a mean age of 24.02±2.435 years. Moreover, 41.09% of the participants were in the clerkship stage, 40.9% were in the internship stage, and 14.7% had at least one parent who was a physician. The most preferred specialties were cardiology, surgery, and ophthalmology, respectively. The mean scores for the overall PPOS, sharing subscale, and caring subscale were 3.61± 0.50, 3.39± 0.64, and 3.83± 0.56, respectively, indicating a predominantly physician-centered attitude among students. There was a significant relationship between the mean scores of the three parts and gender (P-value<0.001), with female students demonstrating more patient-centered attitudes. Academic degree was significantly associated only with the mean score of the sharing subscale. The findings suggest that most medical students at Iran University of Medical Sciences exhibit a physician-centered attitude toward the physician-patient relationship. The results highlight the need for educational programs to promote patient-centered attitudes and enhance patient participation in diagnostic and treatment processes among medical students.
