Views on medical assistance in dying and related arguments: a survey of doctors and nurses at a university hospital.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Svanur Sigurbjörnsson, Brynhildur K Ásgeirsdóttir, Elsa B Valsdóttir
{"title":"Views on medical assistance in dying and related arguments: a survey of doctors and nurses at a university hospital.","authors":"Svanur Sigurbjörnsson, Brynhildur K Ásgeirsdóttir, Elsa B Valsdóttir","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01138-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2021, a survey was conducted among doctors and nurses at Landspítali Iceland University Hospital (LIUH) regarding their views on medical assistance in dying (MAID) and the underlying arguments, the inclusion criteria and modality of implementation. Surveys on identically defined study groups in 1995 and 2010 were used for comparison.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was sent to 357 doctors and 516 nurses working at LIUH. It included seven questions and several subquestions. Participants' answers were compared by profession, age group, and specialisation status. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 135 doctors (38% response rate) and 103 nurses (20% response rate) answered the survey, representing 27% of the study group. A total of 145 (61%) participants were positive about MAID, with the most common argument being patient autonomy. The 95% margin of error for this view was ± 6.2%. Compared to 19% in 2010, support for MAID had tripled in 2021 (p < 0.05). Approximately 18% of participants did not support MAID of any kind, mostly due to arguments regarding preserving life or inconsistencies with the role of health care professionals. Finally, 19% of participants were uncertain of their views towards MAID, mostly due to the high level of complexity of the matter.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to previous surveys, a large increase in positive attitudes towards MAID was observed among this study population. The results revealed the reasons for participants' attitudes; weighing patients' dignity/autonomy against professionals' duty to \"not to kill\"/palliate and showing some differences between professions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"137"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11587625/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01138-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2021, a survey was conducted among doctors and nurses at Landspítali Iceland University Hospital (LIUH) regarding their views on medical assistance in dying (MAID) and the underlying arguments, the inclusion criteria and modality of implementation. Surveys on identically defined study groups in 1995 and 2010 were used for comparison.

Methods: The survey was sent to 357 doctors and 516 nurses working at LIUH. It included seven questions and several subquestions. Participants' answers were compared by profession, age group, and specialisation status. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used.

Results: A total of 135 doctors (38% response rate) and 103 nurses (20% response rate) answered the survey, representing 27% of the study group. A total of 145 (61%) participants were positive about MAID, with the most common argument being patient autonomy. The 95% margin of error for this view was ± 6.2%. Compared to 19% in 2010, support for MAID had tripled in 2021 (p < 0.05). Approximately 18% of participants did not support MAID of any kind, mostly due to arguments regarding preserving life or inconsistencies with the role of health care professionals. Finally, 19% of participants were uncertain of their views towards MAID, mostly due to the high level of complexity of the matter.

Conclusion: Compared to previous surveys, a large increase in positive attitudes towards MAID was observed among this study population. The results revealed the reasons for participants' attitudes; weighing patients' dignity/autonomy against professionals' duty to "not to kill"/palliate and showing some differences between professions.

对临终医疗协助的看法及相关论点:对一家大学医院医生和护士的调查。
背景2021年,冰岛兰茨皮塔利大学医院(LIUH)对医生和护士进行了一项调查,内容涉及他们对临终医疗协助(MAID)的看法、基本论点、纳入标准和实施方式。1995年和2010年对定义相同的研究小组进行的调查用于比较:调查对象包括 357 名医生和 516 名护士。调查包括七个问题和几个小问题。参与者的答案按职业、年龄组和专业状况进行比较。采用了描述性和推论性统计方法:共有 135 名医生(回复率为 38%)和 103 名护士(回复率为 20%)回答了调查问卷,占研究群体的 27%。共有 145 名参与者(61%)对 MAID 持肯定态度,其中最常见的理由是患者自主权。这一观点的 95% 误差率为 ± 6.2%。与2010年的19%相比,2021年对MAID的支持率增加了两倍(p 结论):与之前的调查相比,本研究人群中对 MAID 持积极态度的人数大幅增加。调查结果揭示了参与者持这种态度的原因;权衡了患者的尊严/自主权与专业人员 "不杀害"/缓解病情的职责,并显示了不同专业之间的一些差异。
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
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
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