A Critique Study On A Skin Rash

1880 WordsNov 8, 20168 Pages
Ethics The critique study was approved by “the New York Medical College Committee for Protection of Human Subjects and by the institutional review board of each hospital” (Montecalvo et al., 2012, p. 506). As mentioned previously, exclusion criteria for the study included pregnancy, breast feeding, allergy, and skin conditions (Montecalvo et al., 2012). The researchers encountered an ethical issue when three patients developed a skin rash following the implementation of chlorhexidine bathing cloths during the second phase of the study. The researchers discontinued the bathing; however, they state that the bathing was “restarted in 2 of the 3 patients without adverse event” (Montecalvo et al., 2012, p. 508). It is not stated in the study the reason behind why the researchers chose to continue to re-apply the chlorhexidine bathing cloths or how long they waited before they reapplied the cloths. It is noted that with the third patient, chlorhexidine baths were discontinued completely due to thrombocytopenia that resolved upon the discontinuation of the baths as well as several medications that the patient was taking (Montecalvo et al., 2012). The researchers failed to uphold the ethical principles of respect for persons and beneficence. Respect for persons, as defined by Geri LoBiondo-Wood and Judith Haber, means that people have the right to remain anonymous as well as the right to choose if they want to be a part of the research study (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2014, p. 256). It
Open Document