The Bjork-Shiley Heart Valve Case Study

2198 Words5 Pages

Every year, thousands people get heart valve replacements for various health reasons. There are multiple options for replacement valves that can generally be put into two categories, mechanical and biological. One of the mechanical options from the 1970s and 1980s was the Bjork-Shiley valve, which became infamous because of the controversy surrounding its stress fracture failures. These failures resulted the death of about 400 people, causing the value to be taken off the market. Using various ethical standpoints, the decisions made surrounding this issue must be examine so that an incident like this will not occur in the future. Ultimately, the FDA should require either third party or FDA in-house testing in order to ensure the safety of a …show more content…

Shiley Laboratories did not seem to use any type of cost/benefit analysis to determine the best way forward. Instead, the company’s best interests were put first, leading to incorrect information reported to the FDA so that the valve could stay in production. It also intentionally or unintentionally put the lives saved by the heart values above those that it potentially would kill. Although the reports vary with the exact number of people, of the approximately 85,000 people that received the Bjork-Shiley heart valve, somewhere between 400 and 700 valves fractures, two-thirds of those resulting in death. This means that the valve has a failure rate of less than 1%. Since utilitarianism is solely focused on the greatest good for the greatest number people, it would initially suggest that Shiley Laboratories did the right thing by allowing the production and implantation of this valve to continue. However, upon further inspection, it becomes clear that the ultimate result did not serve the greatest good for the greatest number people. While the valve saved or prolonged the lives of many, the long term results of Shiley Laboratories and …show more content…

The universality imperative states that any action can only be ethical if it remains ethical if it was expanded to a universal law that would apply in any situation. In the case of the Bjork-Shiley heart valve, both the actions of Shiley Laboratories and the FDA must be considered. Using the actions of Shiley Laboratories and Pfizer, the corresponding universal law would be that it is acceptable to sell medical devices, even though it has a known issue. Applying this to any number of situations would result in the loss of credibility and sales for medical device companies if it was acceptable for companies to sell potentially faulty devices. The FDA’s actions can be expanded to the universal law that it is always acceptable to trust companies to properly report all issues with medical devices. However, this too results in a loss of credibility on the part of the FDA since, while it is acceptable to have faith in a company, there is no guarantee that all the information will be properly reported. If any issues go unreported, as they did in the case of the heart valve, the public’s trust in the FDA decreases drastically since it shows that they cannot properly regulate within

Open Document