[MacCAT-T 在主张与实践之间--评估痴呆症患者同意能力的挑战]。

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-28 DOI:10.1055/a-2236-9338
Vasilija Rolfes, Uta Hinz, Heiner Fangerau, Dilara Voßberg, Martin Haupt
{"title":"[MacCAT-T 在主张与实践之间--评估痴呆症患者同意能力的挑战]。","authors":"Vasilija Rolfes, Uta Hinz, Heiner Fangerau, Dilara Voßberg, Martin Haupt","doi":"10.1055/a-2236-9338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consent is a prerequisite for medical diagnostic and therapeutic action. There is no standardised procedure for assessing the ability to give consent. The most widely used tool for structured assessment is the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> People with dementia have impaired capacity to consent because of their disease. In order to answer the question to what extent structured assessment procedures can be usefully applied to people with dementia, we analyse the function, strengths and weaknesses of structured assessment procedures with a focus on the MacCAT-T and discuss suggestions for modification and further development of the tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the PubMed literature database, a systematic literature search and analysis was conducted on papers published since 2010, following PRISMA guidelines.Results Although the MacCAT-T is a valid and reliable tool, it cannot comprehensively address memory problems in people with dementia. It primarily measures cognitive functions. However, Decisions based on emotions, intuitions and values, are not captured by the MacCAT-T. Communicative limitations in people with dementia are not taken into account.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong> It is recommended to provide information in simple language, written down and visualised for people with dementia. The development and elaboration of a graduated procedure for the examination of capacity to consent is indicated. The gradations of the scope and depth of the assessment to be determined should be based on the severity of the cognitive impairment, the benefit/risk ratio of the proposed medical intervention and the individual profile of affective functions and value-based imprints.</p>","PeriodicalId":12353,"journal":{"name":"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie","volume":" ","pages":"413-422"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[MacCAT-T between Claim and Practice - Challenges of Assessing Capacity for Consent in Dementia].\",\"authors\":\"Vasilija Rolfes, Uta Hinz, Heiner Fangerau, Dilara Voßberg, Martin Haupt\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2236-9338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consent is a prerequisite for medical diagnostic and therapeutic action. There is no standardised procedure for assessing the ability to give consent. The most widely used tool for structured assessment is the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> People with dementia have impaired capacity to consent because of their disease. In order to answer the question to what extent structured assessment procedures can be usefully applied to people with dementia, we analyse the function, strengths and weaknesses of structured assessment procedures with a focus on the MacCAT-T and discuss suggestions for modification and further development of the tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the PubMed literature database, a systematic literature search and analysis was conducted on papers published since 2010, following PRISMA guidelines.Results Although the MacCAT-T is a valid and reliable tool, it cannot comprehensively address memory problems in people with dementia. It primarily measures cognitive functions. However, Decisions based on emotions, intuitions and values, are not captured by the MacCAT-T. Communicative limitations in people with dementia are not taken into account.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong> It is recommended to provide information in simple language, written down and visualised for people with dementia. The development and elaboration of a graduated procedure for the examination of capacity to consent is indicated. The gradations of the scope and depth of the assessment to be determined should be based on the severity of the cognitive impairment, the benefit/risk ratio of the proposed medical intervention and the individual profile of affective functions and value-based imprints.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"413-422\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2236-9338\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2236-9338","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:同意是医疗诊断和治疗行动的先决条件。目前还没有评估同意能力的标准化程序。最广泛使用的结构化评估工具是麦克阿瑟治疗能力评估工具(MacCAT-T):目的:痴呆症患者因其疾病而导致同意能力受损。为了回答结构化评估程序在多大程度上可以有效地应用于痴呆症患者这一问题,我们以 MacCAT-T 为重点,分析了结构化评估程序的功能、优缺点,并讨论了修改和进一步开发该工具的建议:结果 虽然 MacCAT-T 是一种有效、可靠的工具,但它不能全面解决痴呆症患者的记忆问题。它主要测量认知功能。然而,基于情感、直觉和价值观的决策并不在 MacCAT-T 的测量范围内。结论:建议用简单的语言、书面形式和可视化方式为痴呆症患者提供信息。建议制定并详细说明分级审查同意能力的程序。评估范围和深度的分级应基于认知障碍的严重程度、拟议医疗干预的效益/风险比以及情感功能和价值印记的个体概况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[MacCAT-T between Claim and Practice - Challenges of Assessing Capacity for Consent in Dementia].

Background: Consent is a prerequisite for medical diagnostic and therapeutic action. There is no standardised procedure for assessing the ability to give consent. The most widely used tool for structured assessment is the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T).

Objectives:  People with dementia have impaired capacity to consent because of their disease. In order to answer the question to what extent structured assessment procedures can be usefully applied to people with dementia, we analyse the function, strengths and weaknesses of structured assessment procedures with a focus on the MacCAT-T and discuss suggestions for modification and further development of the tool.

Methods: Using the PubMed literature database, a systematic literature search and analysis was conducted on papers published since 2010, following PRISMA guidelines.Results Although the MacCAT-T is a valid and reliable tool, it cannot comprehensively address memory problems in people with dementia. It primarily measures cognitive functions. However, Decisions based on emotions, intuitions and values, are not captured by the MacCAT-T. Communicative limitations in people with dementia are not taken into account.

Conclusions:  It is recommended to provide information in simple language, written down and visualised for people with dementia. The development and elaboration of a graduated procedure for the examination of capacity to consent is indicated. The gradations of the scope and depth of the assessment to be determined should be based on the severity of the cognitive impairment, the benefit/risk ratio of the proposed medical intervention and the individual profile of affective functions and value-based imprints.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
139
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Fundiertes Wissen für den Berufsalltag Relevante Originalarbeiten Informative Übersichten zu wichtigen Themen Fortbildungsteil mit Zertifizierung – 36 CME-Punkte pro Jahr Interessante Kasuistiken Referiert & kommentiert: Internationale Studien Aktuelles zu Begutachtung und Neurobiologie International gelistet und häufig zitiert
×
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