BIASES IN HOW PHYSICIANS CHOOSE TO WITHDRAW LIFE-SUPPORT

被引:138
作者
CHRISTAKIS, NA
ASCH, DA
机构
[1] UNIV PENN, LEONARD DAVIS INST HLTH ECON, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 USA
[2] UNIV PENN, SCH MED, DIV FISIOL VEGETAL, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 USA
[3] UNIV PENN, DEPT SOCIOL, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 USA
[4] VET AFFAIRS MED CTR, PHILADELPHIA, PA USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
D O I
10.1016/0140-6736(93)91759-F
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
We have investigated biases in physicians' decisions regarding the form of life support to withdraw from critically ill patients in whom the decision to withdraw has already been made. Using a specially designed instrument that solicited both self-reported preferences and also responses to experimentally varied clinical vignettes, we surveyed 862 American internists, of whom 481 (56%) responded. Physicians do have preferences about the form of life support withdrawn. From most likely to least likely the order is: blood products, haemodialysis, intravenous vasopressors, total parenteral nutrition, antibiotics, mechanical ventilation, tube feedings, and intravenous fluids. Four biases in decision making were also identified. Physicians prefer to withdraw forms of therapy supporting organs that failed for natural rather than iatrogenic reasons, to withdraw recently instituted rather than longstanding interventions, to withdraw forms of therapy resulting in immediate death rather than delayed death, and to withdraw forms of therapy resulting in delayed death when confronted with diagnostic uncertainty. Because these biases may have clinical, social, and ethical consequences counter to patient goals, and because they may affect the underlying decision whether to withdraw life support at all, they may represent impediments to rational and compassionate decision making in critical care.
引用
收藏
页码:642 / 646
页数:5
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1983, PRESIDENTS COMMISSIO
  • [2] OCCUPATIONAL RITUALS IN PATIENT-MANAGEMENT
    BOSK, CL
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1980, 303 (02) : 71 - 76
  • [3] LIMITATIONS OF LISTING SPECIFIC MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS IN ADVANCE DIRECTIVES
    BRETT, AS
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 266 (06): : 825 - 828
  • [4] ATTITUDES OF MEDICAL-STUDENTS, HOUSESTAFF, AND FACULTY PHYSICIANS TOWARD EUTHANASIA AND TERMINATION OF LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENT
    CARALIS, PV
    HAMMOND, JS
    [J]. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1992, 20 (05) : 683 - 690
  • [5] Cassell EJ, 1991, NATURE SUFFERING GOA
  • [6] RESUSCITATION - HOW DO WE DECIDE - A PROSPECTIVE-STUDY OF PHYSICIANS PREFERENCES AND THE CLINICAL COURSE OF HOSPITALIZED-PATIENTS
    CHARLSON, ME
    SAX, FL
    MACKENZIE, CR
    FIELDS, SD
    BRAHAM, RL
    DOUGLAS, RG
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1986, 255 (10): : 1316 - 1322
  • [7] COHEN BJ, 1992, MED DECIS MAKING, V12, P350
  • [8] CRANE D, 1977, SANCTITY SOCIAL LIFE
  • [9] PATIENTS AND FAMILIES PREFERENCES FOR MEDICAL INTENSIVE-CARE
    DANIS, M
    PATRICK, DL
    SOUTHERLAND, LI
    GREEN, ML
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1988, 260 (06): : 797 - 802
  • [10] A PROSPECTIVE-STUDY OF ADVANCE DIRECTIVES FOR LIFE-SUSTAINING CARE
    DANIS, M
    SOUTHERLAND, LI
    GARRETT, JM
    SMITH, JL
    HIELEMA, F
    PICKARD, CG
    EGNER, DM
    PATRICK, DL
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1991, 324 (13) : 882 - 888