Article Text
Abstract
The controversy surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), an antimalarial drug, for COVID-19 has raised numerous ethical and policy problems. Since the suggestion that HCQ has potential for COVID-19, there have been varying responses from clinicians and healthcare institutions, ranging from adoption of protocols using HCQ for routine care to the conduct of randomised controlled trials to an effective system-wide prohibition on its use for COVID-19. In this article, we argue that the concept of ‘disease public profile’ has become a prominent, if not the sole, determinant in decision-making across various healthcare responses to the pandemic. In the case of COVID-19, the disease’s public profile is based on clinical and non-clinical factors that include contagiousness, clinical presentation and media coverage. In particular, we briefly examine the dangers of a heightened public profile in magnifying the inequality of diseases and undermining three key ethical concepts, namely (1) evidence-based practice, (2) sustainable allocation and (3) meaningful consent.
- history of health ethics/bioethics
- distributive justice
- informed consent
- public health ethics
- clinical ethics
This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.
https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usageStatistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors Both authors have substantial contributions to the conception of the manuscript, drafted and revised the manuscript, approved the version to be published and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. YSJA designed the structure and identified the key claims during the development stage; responsible for the ethical discussion raising specific ethical concepts in the manuscript. NC is responsible for the technical details of the drugs and the diseases discussed.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement There are no data in this work.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Influence of COVID-19 pandemic on decisions for the management of people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a survey among EULAR countries
- Hydroxychloroquine in patients with mainly mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019: open label, randomised controlled trial
- A prospective, observational study to evaluate adverse drug reactions in patients with COVID-19 treated with remdesivir or hydroxychloroquine: a preliminary report
- Festina lente: hydroxychloroquine, COVID-19 and the role of the rheumatologist
- Evolving consensus for immunomodulatory therapy in non-infectious uveitis during the COVID-19 pandemic
- The dynamics in applied COVID-19 pharmacotherapy and the influence of national guidance in The Netherlands: a quantitative and qualitative study
- Clinical characteristics of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and the impact on mortality: a single-network, retrospective cohort study from Pennsylvania state
- Controversies over hydroxychloroquine in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection put rheumatologists on the frontline
- Prescribing practices of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin during the COVID-19 epidemic crisis and pharmaceutical interventions in a French teaching hospital
- Examination of patient characteristics and hydroxychloroquine use based on the US Food and Drug Administration’s recommendation: a cross-sectional analysis in New York