医疗服务提供者在拒绝和退出维持生命治疗和自杀的道德和决策能力的看法。

Q1 Arts and Humanities
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-15 DOI:10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961
Thomas D Harter, Erin L Sterenson, Andrew Borgert, Cary Rasmussen
{"title":"医疗服务提供者在拒绝和退出维持生命治疗和自杀的道德和决策能力的看法。","authors":"Thomas D Harter,&nbsp;Erin L Sterenson,&nbsp;Andrew Borgert,&nbsp;Cary Rasmussen","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study attempts to understand if medical providers beliefs about the moral permissibility of honoring patient-directed refusals of life-sustaining treatment (LST) are tied to their beliefs about the patient's decision-making capacity. The study aims to answer: 1) does concern about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity relate to beliefs about whether it is morally acceptable to honor a refusal of LST, 2) are there differences between provider types in assessments of decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST, and 3) do provider demographics impact beliefs about decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST. <b>Methods</b>: A mixed-methods survey using Likert assessment and vignette-based questions was administered to medical providers within a single health system in the upper Midwest (<i>N</i> = 714) to assess their perspectives on the moral acceptance and decision-making capacity in cases of withholding and withdrawing treatment and suicide. <b>Results</b>: Behavioral health providers report accepting of the moral permissibility of suicide (91.2%) more than either medical providers (77.2%) or surgeons (74.4%) (n = 283). Decision-making capacity was questioned more in the vignettes of the patients refusing life-saving surgery (36%) and voluntarily starvation (40.8%) than in the vignette of the patient requesting to deactivate a pacemaker (13%) (n = 283). Behavioral health providers were more concerned about the capacity to refuse life-saving surgery (55.9%) than medical providers (33.8%) or surgeons (23.1%) (n = 283). <b>Conclusions</b>: Respondents endorse the moral permissibility of persons to withhold or withdraw from treatment regardless of motive. Clinical concerns about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity do not strongly correlate to views about the moral permissibility of honoring refusals of LST. Different provider types appear to have different thresholds for when to question treatment decision-making capacity. Behavioral health providers tend to question treatment decision-making capacity to refuse LST more than non-behavioral health providers.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":"12 4","pages":"227-238"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of Medical Providers on Morality and Decision-Making Capacity in Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment and Suicide.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas D Harter,&nbsp;Erin L Sterenson,&nbsp;Andrew Borgert,&nbsp;Cary Rasmussen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study attempts to understand if medical providers beliefs about the moral permissibility of honoring patient-directed refusals of life-sustaining treatment (LST) are tied to their beliefs about the patient's decision-making capacity. The study aims to answer: 1) does concern about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity relate to beliefs about whether it is morally acceptable to honor a refusal of LST, 2) are there differences between provider types in assessments of decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST, and 3) do provider demographics impact beliefs about decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST. <b>Methods</b>: A mixed-methods survey using Likert assessment and vignette-based questions was administered to medical providers within a single health system in the upper Midwest (<i>N</i> = 714) to assess their perspectives on the moral acceptance and decision-making capacity in cases of withholding and withdrawing treatment and suicide. <b>Results</b>: Behavioral health providers report accepting of the moral permissibility of suicide (91.2%) more than either medical providers (77.2%) or surgeons (74.4%) (n = 283). Decision-making capacity was questioned more in the vignettes of the patients refusing life-saving surgery (36%) and voluntarily starvation (40.8%) than in the vignette of the patient requesting to deactivate a pacemaker (13%) (n = 283). Behavioral health providers were more concerned about the capacity to refuse life-saving surgery (55.9%) than medical providers (33.8%) or surgeons (23.1%) (n = 283). <b>Conclusions</b>: Respondents endorse the moral permissibility of persons to withhold or withdraw from treatment regardless of motive. Clinical concerns about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity do not strongly correlate to views about the moral permissibility of honoring refusals of LST. Different provider types appear to have different thresholds for when to question treatment decision-making capacity. Behavioral health providers tend to question treatment decision-making capacity to refuse LST more than non-behavioral health providers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\"12 4\",\"pages\":\"227-238\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/3/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887961","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:本研究试图了解医疗提供者关于尊重病人自主拒绝维持生命治疗(LST)的道德容忍度的信念是否与他们对病人决策能力的信念有关。该研究旨在回答:1)是否关注患者的治疗决策能力与道德上是否接受拒绝LST的信念有关,2)提供者类型在评估决策能力和拒绝LST的道德容忍度方面是否存在差异,以及3)提供者人口统计学是否影响关于决策能力和拒绝LST的道德容忍度的信念。方法:对中西部北部单一卫生系统内的医疗服务提供者(N = 714)进行了一项使用李克特评估和基于小视频的问题的混合方法调查,以评估他们在拒绝和撤回治疗和自杀的情况下对道德接受和决策能力的看法。结果:行为健康提供者报告接受道德允许的自杀(91.2%)高于医疗提供者(77.2%)或外科医生(74.4%)(n = 283)。在拒绝救生手术(36%)和自愿饥饿(40.8%)患者的小插曲中,决策能力受到的质疑多于要求停用起搏器(13%)患者的小插曲(n = 283)。行为健康提供者比医疗提供者(33.8%)或外科医生(23.1%)(n = 283)更关心拒绝救生手术的能力(55.9%)。结论:被调查者赞同无论动机如何,人们在道德上允许拒绝或退出治疗。临床对患者治疗决策能力的关注与尊重LST拒绝的道德容忍度的观点并不强烈相关。对于何时质疑治疗决策能力,不同类型的提供者似乎有不同的阈值。行为健康提供者比非行为健康提供者更倾向于质疑拒绝LST的治疗决策能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perceptions of Medical Providers on Morality and Decision-Making Capacity in Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment and Suicide.

Background: This study attempts to understand if medical providers beliefs about the moral permissibility of honoring patient-directed refusals of life-sustaining treatment (LST) are tied to their beliefs about the patient's decision-making capacity. The study aims to answer: 1) does concern about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity relate to beliefs about whether it is morally acceptable to honor a refusal of LST, 2) are there differences between provider types in assessments of decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST, and 3) do provider demographics impact beliefs about decision-making capacity and the moral permissibility to refuse LST. Methods: A mixed-methods survey using Likert assessment and vignette-based questions was administered to medical providers within a single health system in the upper Midwest (N = 714) to assess their perspectives on the moral acceptance and decision-making capacity in cases of withholding and withdrawing treatment and suicide. Results: Behavioral health providers report accepting of the moral permissibility of suicide (91.2%) more than either medical providers (77.2%) or surgeons (74.4%) (n = 283). Decision-making capacity was questioned more in the vignettes of the patients refusing life-saving surgery (36%) and voluntarily starvation (40.8%) than in the vignette of the patient requesting to deactivate a pacemaker (13%) (n = 283). Behavioral health providers were more concerned about the capacity to refuse life-saving surgery (55.9%) than medical providers (33.8%) or surgeons (23.1%) (n = 283). Conclusions: Respondents endorse the moral permissibility of persons to withhold or withdraw from treatment regardless of motive. Clinical concerns about a patient's treatment decision-making capacity do not strongly correlate to views about the moral permissibility of honoring refusals of LST. Different provider types appear to have different thresholds for when to question treatment decision-making capacity. Behavioral health providers tend to question treatment decision-making capacity to refuse LST more than non-behavioral health providers.

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
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