An Exploratory Study of Capacity Assessment in Medical Practice in Ireland.

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
Eimear Spain, Hope Davidson, Patrick O'Donnell, Amirhossein Jalali, Seoidin McKittrick, Roisin Leo
{"title":"An Exploratory Study of Capacity Assessment in Medical Practice in Ireland.","authors":"Eimear Spain, Hope Davidson, Patrick O'Donnell, Amirhossein Jalali, Seoidin McKittrick, Roisin Leo","doi":"10.1163/15718093-bja10134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current legal test for capacity under the common law is a functional test. It determines whether a person can make a particular decision at a particular time; it focuses on retained abilities rather than on presumed deficits - in order to promote patient autonomy in decision-making. International evidence suggests however that the test is not well understood and consequently not being correctly applied in practice by a range of medical professionals. Donnelly has argued that gaining a better understanding of how capacity assessments are actually employed is essential to improving the quality of assessments. To date, there is little data on how doctors in particular make their assessments in practice. Using a socio-legal methodology, this quantitative study aims to assess understanding of capacity among a group of general practitioners/family medicine doctors in Ireland, and to determine how they assess capacity in clinical practice. Our study found that notwithstanding a lack of confidence in their ability to assess decision-making capacity, that respondents in fact demonstrated a high level of understanding and of ability to correctly apply the functional test in practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":43934,"journal":{"name":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718093-bja10134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current legal test for capacity under the common law is a functional test. It determines whether a person can make a particular decision at a particular time; it focuses on retained abilities rather than on presumed deficits - in order to promote patient autonomy in decision-making. International evidence suggests however that the test is not well understood and consequently not being correctly applied in practice by a range of medical professionals. Donnelly has argued that gaining a better understanding of how capacity assessments are actually employed is essential to improving the quality of assessments. To date, there is little data on how doctors in particular make their assessments in practice. Using a socio-legal methodology, this quantitative study aims to assess understanding of capacity among a group of general practitioners/family medicine doctors in Ireland, and to determine how they assess capacity in clinical practice. Our study found that notwithstanding a lack of confidence in their ability to assess decision-making capacity, that respondents in fact demonstrated a high level of understanding and of ability to correctly apply the functional test in practice.

爱尔兰医疗实践中能力评估的探索性研究。
根据普通法,目前对行为能力的法律测试是一种功能测试。它决定了一个人是否能在特定时间做出特定决定;它侧重于保留的能力而不是假定的缺陷--以促进病人在决策中的自主权。然而,国际证据表明,人们对该测试的理解并不透彻,因此一系列医疗专业人员在实践中并未正确应用该测试。唐纳利认为,更好地了解能力评估的实际应用方式对于提高评估质量至关重要。迄今为止,关于医生在实践中如何进行能力评估的数据还很少。本定量研究采用社会法律方法,旨在评估爱尔兰一群全科/家庭医学医生对行为能力的理解,并确定他们在临床实践中是如何评估行为能力的。我们的研究发现,尽管受访者对自己评估决策能力的能力缺乏信心,但实际上他们对功能测试的理解和在实践中正确应用功能测试的能力都达到了很高的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Jewish Studies (EJJS) is the Journal of the European Association for Jewish Studies (EAJS). Its main purpose is to publish high-quality research articles, essays and shorter contributions on all aspects of Jewish Studies. Submissions are all double blind peer-reviewed. Additionally, EJJS seeks to inform its readers on current developments in Jewish Studies: it carries comprehensive review-essays on specific topics, trends and debated questions, as well as regular book-reviews. A further section carries reports on conferences, symposia, and descriptions of research projects in every area of Jewish Studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信