Practical approaches to the tasks of preserving autonomy and respecting vulnerability among critically ill adult patients: a narrative review.

Critical care science Pub Date : 2025-03-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.62675/2965-2774.20250234
João Gabriel Rosa Ramos, Camila Vasconcelos, Luciana Dadalto
{"title":"Practical approaches to the tasks of preserving autonomy and respecting vulnerability among critically ill adult patients: a narrative review.","authors":"João Gabriel Rosa Ramos, Camila Vasconcelos, Luciana Dadalto","doi":"10.62675/2965-2774.20250234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Respect for autonomy and human vulnerability are bioethical principles that are frequently involved in decision-making dilemmas in the context of critical care. Multiple challenges are involved in the tasks of assessing and respecting the autonomy of critically ill patients with respect to the critical illness in question, patients' cognitive status and the context of intensive care units; furthermore, time constraints and emotional stress complicate decision-making for all stakeholders in this context. In addition, critically ill patients are inherently vulnerable to multiple sources of potential unintended harm. Therefore, clinicians working in intensive care units must develop the skills necessary to acknowledge, assess and mitigate those risks. In this manuscript, we review the literature on this topic. We also propose a practical approach that can help overcome some of those challenges; specifically, we advocate for the adoption of a relational approach to autonomy and shared decision-making, which could help overcome those challenges, thereby promoting more effective and ethical patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":72721,"journal":{"name":"Critical care science","volume":"37 ","pages":"e20250234"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12014082/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62675/2965-2774.20250234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Respect for autonomy and human vulnerability are bioethical principles that are frequently involved in decision-making dilemmas in the context of critical care. Multiple challenges are involved in the tasks of assessing and respecting the autonomy of critically ill patients with respect to the critical illness in question, patients' cognitive status and the context of intensive care units; furthermore, time constraints and emotional stress complicate decision-making for all stakeholders in this context. In addition, critically ill patients are inherently vulnerable to multiple sources of potential unintended harm. Therefore, clinicians working in intensive care units must develop the skills necessary to acknowledge, assess and mitigate those risks. In this manuscript, we review the literature on this topic. We also propose a practical approach that can help overcome some of those challenges; specifically, we advocate for the adoption of a relational approach to autonomy and shared decision-making, which could help overcome those challenges, thereby promoting more effective and ethical patient care.

在危重成人患者中保持自主性和尊重脆弱性的实际方法:叙述回顾。
尊重自主权和人的脆弱性是生物伦理原则,经常涉及在重症监护背景下的决策困境。在评估和尊重危重患者的自主性方面,涉及到多重挑战,包括危重疾病、患者的认知状况和重症监护病房的环境;此外,在这种情况下,时间限制和情绪压力使所有利益相关者的决策复杂化。此外,危重病人本身就容易受到多种潜在意外伤害来源的伤害。因此,在重症监护病房工作的临床医生必须培养必要的技能来认识、评估和减轻这些风险。在这篇文章中,我们回顾了关于这一主题的文献。我们还提出了一种实用的方法,可以帮助克服其中的一些挑战;具体来说,我们提倡采用一种自主和共同决策的关系方法,这有助于克服这些挑战,从而促进更有效和更合乎道德的患者护理。
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
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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