Unconsented HIV testing in cases of occupational exposure: ethics, law, and policy.
Unconsented HIV testing in cases of occupational exposure: ethics, law, and policy.
复制标题
职业暴露情况下未经同意的艾滋病毒检测：道德、法律和政策。
DOI：
10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01453.x
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Macklin,Ruth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cowan,Ethan;Macklin,Ruth
学术急救医学学会2012; 19：1181-1187 © 2012，摘要暴露后预防（PEP）大大降低了职业暴露后获得人类免疫缺陷病毒（HIV）的风险;然而，暴露于HIV仍然是急诊科提供者关注的问题。根据已发表的指南，PEP仅应在源患者为HIV阳性或有HIV风险因素时使用。在源患者未受感染时启动PEP会使暴露人员处于服用有毒药物的风险中，而没有补偿益处。放弃PEP，如果源被感染的结果增加获得艾滋病毒的风险。如果源头患者拒绝HIV检测，该怎么办？不顾这些患者的自主反对而对其进行血液检测是否合理？作者回顾了现行的法律和政策，并进行了伦理分析，以确定法律允许在职业暴露的情况下进行未经同意的检测是否在伦理上是合理的。
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2012; 19:1181–1187 © 2012 by the Society for Academic Emergency MedicineAbstractPostexposure prophylaxis (PEP) has substantially reduced the risk of acquiring human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) after an occupational exposure; nevertheless, exposure to HIV remains a concern for emergency department providers. According to published guidelines, PEP should be taken only when source patients are HIV‐positive or have risk factors for HIV. Initiating PEP when source patients are uninfected puts exposed persons at risk from taking toxic drugs with no compensating benefit. Forgoing PEP if the source is infected results in increased risk of acquiring HIV. What should be done if source patients refuse HIV testing? Is it justifiable to test the blood of these patients over their autonomous objection? The authors review current law and policy and perform an ethical analysis to determine if laws permitting unconsented testing in cases of occupational exposure can be ethically justified.