O anestesiologista frente à terminalidade

IF 1 Q3 Medicine
Rodney Segura Cavalcante , Guilherme Antonio Moreira de Barros , Eliana Marisa Ganem
{"title":"O anestesiologista frente à terminalidade","authors":"Rodney Segura Cavalcante ,&nbsp;Guilherme Antonio Moreira de Barros ,&nbsp;Eliana Marisa Ganem","doi":"10.1016/j.bjan.2020.03.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>Advances in medicine, including anesthesiology and resuscitation, have made natural death increasingly rare. As a consequence, dysthanasia has become usual in a scenario for which there is not rationale. The present study aimed to assess the level of knowledge of Brazilian anesthesiologists on the principles of dysthanasia and orthothanasia. Thence, we studied the management preferences of these professionals, <em>vis‐à‐vis</em> those practices, as well as how medical school contributed to addressing death‐related issues.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Quantitative approach, prospective and descriptive cohort that included 150 anesthesiologists, members of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology, and who were invited to participate by email. An online questionnaire containing 38 questions was prepared by the authors. The study was approved by the Instructional Research Ethics Committee.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Anesthesiologists, although claiming to know dysthanasia and orthothanasia, mostly acquired knowledge outside medical school. If faced with their own end of care, or of a patient or a loved one, they prefer orthothanasia, to die at home, prioritizing dignity. However, the specialists claimed to have already practiced dysthanasia, even when orthothanasia was the choice management, which caused them negative feelings. Almost all respondents stated that they did not have practical training in undergraduate school on how to face end‐of‐life issues, although they felt capable of identifying it. Most were not aware of Federal Council of Medicine Resolution 1.805/06 that makes practicing orthothanasia feasible. Anesthesiologists’ religion or the political‐administrative region of residence had no effect on their preferences.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Anesthesiologists claim to have knowledge on dysthanasia and orthothanasia, but prefer, in the face of a terminally ill patient, to practice orthothanasia, although dysthanasia is usual, and results in frustration and indignation. The medical school curriculum is unsatisfactory in addressing death‐related issues.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21261,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","volume":"70 3","pages":"Pages 225-232"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjan.2020.03.008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034709420303238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives

Advances in medicine, including anesthesiology and resuscitation, have made natural death increasingly rare. As a consequence, dysthanasia has become usual in a scenario for which there is not rationale. The present study aimed to assess the level of knowledge of Brazilian anesthesiologists on the principles of dysthanasia and orthothanasia. Thence, we studied the management preferences of these professionals, vis‐à‐vis those practices, as well as how medical school contributed to addressing death‐related issues.

Method

Quantitative approach, prospective and descriptive cohort that included 150 anesthesiologists, members of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology, and who were invited to participate by email. An online questionnaire containing 38 questions was prepared by the authors. The study was approved by the Instructional Research Ethics Committee.

Results

Anesthesiologists, although claiming to know dysthanasia and orthothanasia, mostly acquired knowledge outside medical school. If faced with their own end of care, or of a patient or a loved one, they prefer orthothanasia, to die at home, prioritizing dignity. However, the specialists claimed to have already practiced dysthanasia, even when orthothanasia was the choice management, which caused them negative feelings. Almost all respondents stated that they did not have practical training in undergraduate school on how to face end‐of‐life issues, although they felt capable of identifying it. Most were not aware of Federal Council of Medicine Resolution 1.805/06 that makes practicing orthothanasia feasible. Anesthesiologists’ religion or the political‐administrative region of residence had no effect on their preferences.

Conclusions

Anesthesiologists claim to have knowledge on dysthanasia and orthothanasia, but prefer, in the face of a terminally ill patient, to practice orthothanasia, although dysthanasia is usual, and results in frustration and indignation. The medical school curriculum is unsatisfactory in addressing death‐related issues.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

麻醉师面临绝症
背景与目的医学的进步,包括麻醉学和复苏,使得自然死亡越来越罕见。因此,dysthanasia在没有理由的情况下变得很常见。本研究旨在评估巴西麻醉师对呼吸困难和呼吸原位法原理的知识水平。因此,我们研究了这些专业人员相对于这些实践的管理偏好,以及医学院如何有助于解决与死亡相关的问题。方法采用定量方法,前瞻性和描述性队列研究,包括150名麻醉医师,巴西麻醉学会会员,并通过电子邮件邀请参与。作者准备了一份包含38个问题的在线问卷。本研究已获教学研究伦理委员会批准。结果麻醉医师虽然自称了解异常状态和原位状态,但大多是在医学院以外获得的知识。如果面对自己、病人或亲人的临终关怀,他们更愿意选择安乐死,在家里死去,把尊严放在首位。然而,专家们声称他们已经练习过失念,甚至当正念是选择管理时,这给他们带来了负面情绪。几乎所有的受访者都表示,他们在本科学校没有接受过如何面对生命终结问题的实践培训,尽管他们觉得自己有能力识别它。大多数人都不知道联邦医学委员会第1.805/06号决议,该决议使实施安乐死成为可能。麻醉师的宗教信仰或居住地的政治行政区域对他们的选择没有影响。结论:虽然感觉医生声称自己掌握了濒死状态和濒死状态的知识,但面对临终病人时,他们更倾向于采用濒死状态,尽管濒死状态很常见,而且会导致沮丧和愤慨。在处理与死亡有关的问题上,医学院的课程并不令人满意。
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
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology is the official journal of the Brazilian Anesthesiology Society. It publishes articles classified into the following categories: -Scientific articles (clinical or experimental trials)- Clinical information (case reports)- Reviews- Letters to the Editor- Editorials. The journal focuses primarily on clinical trials, with scope on clinical practice, aiming at providing applied tools to the anesthesiologist and critical care physician. The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology accepts articles exclusively forwarded to it. Articles already published in other journals are not accepted. All articles proposed for publication are previously submitted to the analysis of two or more members of the Editorial Board or other specialized consultants.
×
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