Advanced Search

Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > Europa Medicophysica 1999 September;35(3) > Europa Medicophysica 1999 September;35(3):143-7



A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063

Frequency: Bi-Monthly

ISSN 1973-9087

Online ISSN 1973-9095


Europa Medicophysica 1999 September;35(3):143-7


Ethics: indis­pens­able fac­tors in the out­come of reha­bil­i­ta­tion

Carta A.

ASL of the Province of Varese, Italy

Specialists in reha­bil­i­ta­tion ­have ­shown grow­ing inter­est in eth­i­cal ­issues. This ­paper is my con­tri­bu­tion to the ­debate. Problems relat­ed to the eval­u­a­tions and out­comes of reha­bil­i­ta­tion ­have ­received ­much atten­tion in the sci­en­tif­ic lit­er­a­ture. In par­allel, numer­ous arti­cles ­have ­expressed the ­sense of ­unease and ­need for eth­i­cal ­lines of con­duct ­when fac­ing ­hard med­i­cal choic­es, exac­er­bat­ed by evi­dent finan­cial restric­tions. A ­thorough ­review of the lit­er­a­ture yield­ed a selec­tion of eth­i­cal con­sid­er­a­tions ­that are wide­ly accept­ed by ­well-reput­ed ­authors. These are pre­sent­ed ­along ­with my own com­ments on ­some of the ­most recur­rent ­issues: - rec­on­cil­ing sci­en­tif­ic valid­ity ­with ­patients’ ­informed con­sent; -judg­ing the capac­ity to eval­u­ate the ­results of treat­ments; - rec­on­cil­ing the State’s ­need to lim­it spend­ing on ­health-­care ­with ­patients’ ­right to prop­er ­care (­with par­tic­u­lar ref­er­ence to dis­abled ­patients); - set­ting cri­te­ria for the selec­tion and inclu­sion of ­patients in reha­bil­i­ta­tion pro­grammes, includ­ing ­patients ­with chron­ic dis­eas­es; safe­guard­ing per­son­al auton­o­my, ­even in cas­es of ­severe dis­abil­ity. Some of ­these con­cepts are illus­trat­ed by exam­ples aim­ing to dem­on­strate the impor­tance of ensur­ing ­that reha­bil­i­ta­tion spe­cial­ists ­receive a ­thorough ground­ing in eth­ics if ­they are to act as com­pe­tent pro­fes­sion­als. It is ­hoped ­that the arti­cle ­will stim­u­late a fruit­ful ­exchange of opin­ions on the con­sid­er­a­tions ­expressed and on the ­vast ­field of appli­ca­tions of eth­ics in reha­bil­i­ta­tion.

language: English


top of page