Key Physician Behaviors that Predict Prudent, Preference Concordant Decisions at the End of Life.

Q1 Arts and Humanities
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Epub Date: 2020-12-31 DOI:10.1080/23294515.2020.1865476
Andre Morales, Alan Murphy, Joseph B Fanning, Shasha Gao, Kevan Schultz, Daniel E Hall, Amber Barnato
{"title":"Key Physician Behaviors that Predict Prudent, Preference Concordant Decisions at the End of Life.","authors":"Andre Morales,&nbsp;Alan Murphy,&nbsp;Joseph B Fanning,&nbsp;Shasha Gao,&nbsp;Kevan Schultz,&nbsp;Daniel E Hall,&nbsp;Amber Barnato","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2020.1865476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study introduces an empirical approach for studying the role of prudence in physician treatment of end-of-life (EOL) decision making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods analysis of transcripts from 88 simulated patient encounters in a multicenter study on EOL decision making. Physicians in internal medicine, emergency medicine, and critical care medicine were asked to evaluate a decompensating, end-stage cancer patient. Transcripts of the encounters were coded for actor, action, and content to capture the concept of Aristotelian prudence, and then quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed to identify actions associated with preference-concordant treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Focusing on codes that describe characteristics of physician-patient interaction, the code for physicians restating patient preferences was associated with avoiding intubation. Multiple codes were associated with secondary measures of preference-concordant treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prudent actions can be identified empirically, and research focused on the virtue of prudence may provide a new avenue for assessment and training in EOL care.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":"12 4","pages":"215-226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23294515.2020.1865476","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2020.1865476","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/12/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: This study introduces an empirical approach for studying the role of prudence in physician treatment of end-of-life (EOL) decision making.

Methods: A mixed-methods analysis of transcripts from 88 simulated patient encounters in a multicenter study on EOL decision making. Physicians in internal medicine, emergency medicine, and critical care medicine were asked to evaluate a decompensating, end-stage cancer patient. Transcripts of the encounters were coded for actor, action, and content to capture the concept of Aristotelian prudence, and then quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed to identify actions associated with preference-concordant treatment.

Results: Focusing on codes that describe characteristics of physician-patient interaction, the code for physicians restating patient preferences was associated with avoiding intubation. Multiple codes were associated with secondary measures of preference-concordant treatment.

Conclusions: Prudent actions can be identified empirically, and research focused on the virtue of prudence may provide a new avenue for assessment and training in EOL care.

Abstract Image

预测临终时谨慎、偏好和决定的关键医师行为。
背景:本研究引入一种实证方法来研究审慎在医生治疗临终(EOL)决策中的作用。方法:采用混合方法分析多中心EOL决策研究中88例模拟患者遭遇的转录本。我们要求内科、急诊和重症医学的医生对一位失代偿的终末期癌症患者进行评估。为了捕捉亚里士多德审慎的概念,对这些遭遇的记录进行了编码,然后对其进行定量和定性分析,以确定与偏好一致治疗相关的行为。结果:重点关注描述医患互动特征的代码,医生重申患者偏好的代码与避免插管相关。多重编码与偏好-一致性治疗的二级测量相关。结论:审慎行为可通过经验识别,对审慎行为美德的研究可为EOL护理的评估和培训提供新的途径。
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
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
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