Clinical Ethics for Urologists (2020): Module 3: Resolving Dilemmas

In practicing medicine - i.e., in diagnosing, treating, and caring for patients - is clinical reasoning different and separate from ethical reasoning? Are clinical decision making and ethical decision making in medicine different and separable processes? Are ethical problems in medicine different from clinical problems? These are seemingly simple - but, in reality, profound - questions. Nonetheless, tentative responses to them can be formulated by referring back to module 2, specifically to the argument found there that medicine is an inherently moral or ethical endeavor. In other words, the “ethical” aspects of medicine cannot be neatly separated from the “clinical” aspects. Ethics are neither ancillary nor tangential to clinical medicine. One would be hard-pressed to identify some aspect of medicine that is free of ethical significance. The very way in which a physician first approaches and engages their patient has ethical import.

Target Audience

  • Residents
  • Practicing Urologists
  • Advanced Practice Providers

Learning Objectives

After completing this activity, participants will be able to:

  1. Describe the role of ethics in both medicine and the law. 
  2. Explain the two methods for conducting an ethics work-up.
Course summary
Available credit: 
  • 0.50 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™
  • 0.50 Non-Physician Participation
Course opens: 
03/23/2020
Course expires: 
03/23/2023
Part of: 
Clinical Ethics for Urologists (2020)
Rating: 
0

METHOD OF PARTICIPATION: 

Learners will participate in this online educational activity by taking the pretest, viewing the online modules and completing the posttest and evaluation. To claim CME credit for this enduring material, learners must complete the post-test, passing with 80% accuracy and submit the program evaluation.

Estimated time to complete this activity: 0.50 hours

Original Release Date: January, 2008
Expiration Date: March, 2023

Peer Review:
This activity was peer reviewed in January, 2011
This activity was peer reviewed in January, 2014
This activity was peer reviewed in March, 2020

ACCREDITATION: 

The American Urological Association (AUA) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

CREDIT DESIGNATION: 

The American Urological Association designates this enduring activity for a maximum of 0.50 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

OTHER LEARNERS: 

The AUA is not accredited to offer credit to participants who are not MDs or DOs. However, the AUA will issue documentation of participation that states that the activity was certified for AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™.

EVIDENCE BASED CONTENT: 

It is the policy of the AUA to ensure that the content contained in this CME activity is valid, fair, balanced, scientifically rigorous, and free of commercial bias.

AUA DISCLOSURE POLICY: 

All persons in a position to control the content of an educational activity (i.e., activity planners, presenters, authors) are required to disclose to the provider any relevant financial relationships with any commercial interest. The AUA must determine if the individual’s relationships may influence the educational content and resolve any conflicts of interest prior to the commencement of the educational activity. The intent of this disclosure is not to prevent individuals with relevant financial relationships from participating, but rather to provide learners information with which they can make their own judgments.

RESOLUTION OF IDENTIFIED CONFLICT OF INTEREST: 

All disclosures will be reviewed by the program/course directors or editors for identification of conflicts of interest. Peer reviewers, working with the program directors and/or editors, will document the mechanism(s) for management and resolution of the conflict of interest and final approval of the activity will be documented prior to implementation. Any of the mechanisms below can/will be used to resolve conflict of interest:

  • Peer review for valid, evidence-based content of all materials associated with an educational activity by the course/program director, editor, and/or Education Content Review Committee or its subgroup.
  • Limit content to evidence with no recommendations
  • Introduction of a debate format with an unbiased moderator (point-counterpoint)
  • Inclusion of moderated panel discussion
  • Publication of a parallel or rebuttal article for an article that is felt to be biased
  • Limit equipment representatives to providing logistics and operation support only in procedural demonstrations
  • Divestiture of the relationship by faculty

OFF-LABEL OR UNAPPROVED USE OF DRUGS OR DEVICES: 

The audience is advised that this continuing medical education activity may contain reference(s) to off-label or unapproved uses of drugs or devices. Please consult the prescribing information for full disclosure of approved uses.

Available Credit

  • 0.50 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™
  • 0.50 Non-Physician Participation
Please login or register to take this course.