Conflict resolution at the end of life

被引:33
作者
Fetters, MD
Churchill, L
Danis, M
机构
[1] Univ Michigan Hlth Syst, Dept Family Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan Hlth Syst, Japanese Family Hlth Program, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[4] NIH, Warren G Magnuson Clin Ctr, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
关键词
terminal care; decision making; resuscitation orders; life support care; ethics; medical; patient participation; physician-patient relations; competence; communication; palliation;
D O I
10.1097/00003246-200105000-00001
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Objective: Limited empirical research has examined how decisions are made when the preferences of terminally ill patients conflict with physicians' recommendations. This study sought to investigate physicians' strategies for resolving conflicts with dying patients, Design: Cross-sectional, qualitative interviews, Subjects, Subjects were 158 physicians caring for at least one terminally ill patient. Setting: University medical center. Measurements and Main Results: We analyzed physicians' responses to the open-ended interview questions, "How do you handle a situation when a patient wants a treatment that you believe does not provide any benefit?" and "How do you handle a situation when a patient does not want a treatment you think would be beneficial?" For patient requests of nonbeneficial treatments, physicians reported the following as important: negotiating with and educating patients (71%), deferring to patient requests for benign or uncomplicated treatments (34%), convincing patients to forgo treatments (33%), refusing patient requests for nonbeneficial treatment (22%), using family influence (16%), not offering futile treatments (13%), and referring to other physicians for disputed care (9%), Potential harm (23%) and cost of treatment (18%) were reasons cited for withholding treatments, In response to patient refusals of beneficial treatments, physicians report the following as important: negotiating with patients (59%), convincing patients to receive treatment (41%), assessing patient competence (32%), using family influence (27%), and referring to other physicians (21%), Conclusions: Physicians vary in the communication and negotiation strategies they use when their medical judgment conflicts with dying patients' preferences. Medical ethicists could play a greater role in teaching ethically important communication skills. Physicians providing care at the end of life report strategies for respecting patients that reflect graduated degrees of accommodation tailored to the costliness and riskiness of requests; they are most accepting of patient requests for benign, technically easy, inexpensive, and medically effective treatments.
引用
收藏
页码:921 / 925
页数:5
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   MEDICAL-STUDENTS TALKING TO PATIENTS [J].
ALEXANDER, DA ;
KNOX, JDE ;
MORRISON, AT .
MEDICAL EDUCATION, 1977, 11 (06) :390-393
[2]  
*AM PSYCH ASS, 1997, J AM ACAD PSYCHIAT L, V25, P121
[3]   GENERAL-PRACTITIONERS COMMENTS ON VIDEO RECORDED CONSULTATIONS AS AN AID TO UNDERSTANDING THE DOCTOR-PATIENT-RELATIONSHIP [J].
ARBORELIUS, E ;
TIMPKA, T .
FAMILY PRACTICE, 1990, 7 (02) :84-90
[4]   NEW GUIDELINES ON FORGOING LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENT IN INCOMPETENT PATIENTS - AN ANTI-CRUELTY POLICY [J].
BRAITHWAITE, S ;
THOMASMA, DC .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1986, 104 (05) :711-715
[5]   DEVELOPMENT OF A LITIGAPHOBIA SCALE - MEASUREMENT OF EXCESSIVE FEAR OF LITIGATION [J].
BRESLIN, FA ;
TAYLOR, KR ;
BRODSKY, SL .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 1986, 58 (02) :547-550
[6]   WHEN PATIENTS REQUEST SPECIFIC INTERVENTIONS - DEFINING THE LIMITS OF THE PHYSICIANS OBLIGATION [J].
BRETT, AS ;
MCCULLOUGH, LB .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1986, 315 (21) :1347-1351
[7]   TRANSPARENCY - INFORMED CONSENT IN PRIMARY CARE [J].
BRODY, H .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1989, 19 (05) :5-9
[8]   AUTONOMY - A MORAL GOOD, NOT A MORAL OBSESSION [J].
CALLAHAN, D .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1984, 14 (05) :40-42
[9]   Death and the research imperative. [J].
Callahan, D .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (09) :654-656
[10]   The authority of the clinical ethicist [J].
Casarett, DJ ;
Daskal, F ;
Lantos, J .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1998, 28 (06) :6-11