The road not taken: Forgoing disease-directed treatments in advanced cancer. A rejoinder to ‘Concepts of health, ethics, and communication in shared decision making’ by Lauris Kaldjian

Q4 Medicine
L. Cripe, R. Frankel
{"title":"The road not taken: Forgoing disease-directed treatments in advanced cancer. A rejoinder to ‘Concepts of health, ethics, and communication in shared decision making’ by Lauris Kaldjian","authors":"L. Cripe, R. Frankel","doi":"10.1558/CAM.36371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Between 1961 and 1979 physicians changed their practice from most often not telling patients their diagnoses of cancer to routinely disclosing it (Oken 1961; Novack et al. 1979). The change can be explained, in large part, by advances in cancer treatment, growing appreciation of the duty to obtain informed consent, changes in professional values, and the rise of the patients’ rights movement. It soon became apparent, however, that patients with advanced cancer were often unaware of their prognoses because prognostic disclosure was far more challenging to physicians than diagnostic disclosure. In 1995, investigators of the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) reported that an intervention to inform physicians of prognostic estimates and a nurse to elicit patient preferences and encourage patient–physician communication did not improve the frequency of code status discussions, physician awareness of patient resuscitation preferences, or number of days in the intensive care unit (ICU) (Connors 1995). In reflecting on the progress between the publication of the SUPPORT study and the 2015 Institute of Medicine report Improving Quality and Honoring Individual Preferences near the End of Life, we wondered whether the persistent concerns about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care and patient awareness of prognosis are due to flaws in clinician appreciation of the ethical principles of informed/shared decision making or clinician communication skills.","PeriodicalId":39728,"journal":{"name":"Communication and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/CAM.36371","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Between 1961 and 1979 physicians changed their practice from most often not telling patients their diagnoses of cancer to routinely disclosing it (Oken 1961; Novack et al. 1979). The change can be explained, in large part, by advances in cancer treatment, growing appreciation of the duty to obtain informed consent, changes in professional values, and the rise of the patients’ rights movement. It soon became apparent, however, that patients with advanced cancer were often unaware of their prognoses because prognostic disclosure was far more challenging to physicians than diagnostic disclosure. In 1995, investigators of the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) reported that an intervention to inform physicians of prognostic estimates and a nurse to elicit patient preferences and encourage patient–physician communication did not improve the frequency of code status discussions, physician awareness of patient resuscitation preferences, or number of days in the intensive care unit (ICU) (Connors 1995). In reflecting on the progress between the publication of the SUPPORT study and the 2015 Institute of Medicine report Improving Quality and Honoring Individual Preferences near the End of Life, we wondered whether the persistent concerns about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care and patient awareness of prognosis are due to flaws in clinician appreciation of the ethical principles of informed/shared decision making or clinician communication skills.
没有走的路:放弃针对晚期癌症的疾病治疗。对Lauris Kaldjian的“共同决策中的健康、伦理和沟通概念”的回应
从1961年到1979年,医生们改变了他们的做法,从通常不告诉病人他们的癌症诊断到定期披露(Oken 1961;Novack et al. 1979)。这种变化在很大程度上可以解释为癌症治疗的进步、人们越来越认识到获得知情同意的责任、职业价值观的变化以及患者权利运动的兴起。然而,很快就发现,晚期癌症患者往往不知道自己的预后,因为对医生来说,披露预后比披露诊断要困难得多。1995年,“了解预后和治疗结果和风险偏好研究”(SUPPORT)的研究人员报告说,告知医生预后估计的干预和护士诱导患者偏好和鼓励医患沟通的干预并没有提高代码状态讨论的频率,医生对患者复苏偏好的认识,或在重症监护病房(ICU)的天数(Connors 1995)。回顾SUPPORT研究的发表和2015年医学研究所报告《改善生命末期的质量和尊重个人偏好》之间的进展,我们想知道,对生命末期(EOL)护理质量和患者预后意识的持续关注,是否由于临床医生对知情/共同决策的伦理原则或临床医生沟通技巧的理解存在缺陷。
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
Communication and Medicine
Communication and Medicine Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Communication & Medicine continues to abide by the following distinctive aims: • To consolidate different traditions of discourse and communication research in its commitment to an understanding of psychosocial, cultural and ethical aspects of healthcare in contemporary societies. • To cover the different specialities within medicine and allied healthcare studies. • To underscore the significance of specific areas and themes by bringing out special issues from time to time. • To be fully committed to publishing evidence-based, data-driven original studies with practical application and relevance as key guiding principles.
×
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