医疗保健ProfessionalsâÂÂ基于实践理性自主性的临终关怀展望

Gonçalves Am, A. Vieira, A. Vilaça, Gonçalves Mm, R. Meneses
{"title":"医疗保健ProfessionalsâÂÂ基于实践理性自主性的临终关怀展望","authors":"Gonçalves Am, A. Vieira, A. Vilaça, Gonçalves Mm, R. Meneses","doi":"10.24105/2155-9627.10.333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays, innovative medical technologies almost mask death, although they are not free of ethical concerns. Regarding end-of-life decisions, publications demonstrate that doctors don’t intend for themselves what they practice with patients. We aimed to assess health professionals’ perspectives about their own end-of-life decisions, asking them “In case of advanced oncological disease, would you prefer rescue or comfort therapy?” and “In case of advanced chronic disease, would you prefer admission in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or palliative care?”. The sample included 57% doctors. 80% of all participants chose comfort therapy and 84% chose palliative care. Nurses chose comfort therapy and palliative care more frequently than doctors (p<0.05); both doctors and nurses from surgical areas preferred rescue therapy and ICU admission (p<0.05); more than half of pediatricians answered rescue therapy and ICU admission, this trend was also observed in oncologist/palliative care doctors and surgeons, with a statistical difference (p<0.05) compared to other doctors; on the opposite, 90% from Emergency and Intensive Medicine doctors answered comfort therapy and palliative care (p<0.05). Communication with patients and families must be more effective, making them understand that the appropriate clinical decision is the most ethically correct. Death is not something to be avoided at all costs, but rather a moment on life cycle. These issues should be discussed in advance, anticipating the possible need for admission to ICU, rescue therapy or setting limits and gently stops.","PeriodicalId":89408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical research & bioethics","volume":"10 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare Professionalsâ Perspectives on End-of-Life Care According toAutonomy of Practical Reason\",\"authors\":\"Gonçalves Am, A. Vieira, A. Vilaça, Gonçalves Mm, R. Meneses\",\"doi\":\"10.24105/2155-9627.10.333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Nowadays, innovative medical technologies almost mask death, although they are not free of ethical concerns. Regarding end-of-life decisions, publications demonstrate that doctors don’t intend for themselves what they practice with patients. We aimed to assess health professionals’ perspectives about their own end-of-life decisions, asking them “In case of advanced oncological disease, would you prefer rescue or comfort therapy?” and “In case of advanced chronic disease, would you prefer admission in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or palliative care?”. The sample included 57% doctors. 80% of all participants chose comfort therapy and 84% chose palliative care. Nurses chose comfort therapy and palliative care more frequently than doctors (p<0.05); both doctors and nurses from surgical areas preferred rescue therapy and ICU admission (p<0.05); more than half of pediatricians answered rescue therapy and ICU admission, this trend was also observed in oncologist/palliative care doctors and surgeons, with a statistical difference (p<0.05) compared to other doctors; on the opposite, 90% from Emergency and Intensive Medicine doctors answered comfort therapy and palliative care (p<0.05). Communication with patients and families must be more effective, making them understand that the appropriate clinical decision is the most ethically correct. Death is not something to be avoided at all costs, but rather a moment on life cycle. These issues should be discussed in advance, anticipating the possible need for admission to ICU, rescue therapy or setting limits and gently stops.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical research & bioethics\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical research & bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24105/2155-9627.10.333\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical research & bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24105/2155-9627.10.333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如今,创新的医疗技术几乎掩盖了死亡,尽管它们并非没有伦理问题。关于临终决定,出版物表明,医生对病人的做法并不是他们自己想要的。我们的目的是评估健康专业人员对自己临终决定的看法,问他们“在晚期肿瘤疾病的情况下,你更喜欢抢救治疗还是安慰治疗?”以及“如果是晚期慢性疾病,您希望住进重症监护病房(ICU)还是姑息治疗?”样本中有57%是医生。80%的参与者选择舒适治疗,84%选择姑息治疗。护士选择舒适治疗和姑息治疗的频率高于医生(p<0.05);外科主治医师和护士均倾向于抢救治疗和ICU住院(p<0.05);超过一半的儿科医生回答抢救治疗和ICU住院,肿瘤/姑息治疗医生和外科医生也有这种趋势,与其他医生相比差异有统计学意义(p<0.05);与此相反,90%的急诊科和重症医学科医生回答安慰治疗和姑息治疗(p<0.05)。与患者和家属的沟通必须更加有效,使他们明白,适当的临床决定是最合乎道德的。死亡不是要不惜一切代价避免的,而是生命周期中的一个时刻。这些问题应提前讨论,预测可能需要入院ICU,抢救治疗或设置限制和轻轻地停止。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Healthcare Professionalsâ Perspectives on End-of-Life Care According toAutonomy of Practical Reason
Nowadays, innovative medical technologies almost mask death, although they are not free of ethical concerns. Regarding end-of-life decisions, publications demonstrate that doctors don’t intend for themselves what they practice with patients. We aimed to assess health professionals’ perspectives about their own end-of-life decisions, asking them “In case of advanced oncological disease, would you prefer rescue or comfort therapy?” and “In case of advanced chronic disease, would you prefer admission in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or palliative care?”. The sample included 57% doctors. 80% of all participants chose comfort therapy and 84% chose palliative care. Nurses chose comfort therapy and palliative care more frequently than doctors (p<0.05); both doctors and nurses from surgical areas preferred rescue therapy and ICU admission (p<0.05); more than half of pediatricians answered rescue therapy and ICU admission, this trend was also observed in oncologist/palliative care doctors and surgeons, with a statistical difference (p<0.05) compared to other doctors; on the opposite, 90% from Emergency and Intensive Medicine doctors answered comfort therapy and palliative care (p<0.05). Communication with patients and families must be more effective, making them understand that the appropriate clinical decision is the most ethically correct. Death is not something to be avoided at all costs, but rather a moment on life cycle. These issues should be discussed in advance, anticipating the possible need for admission to ICU, rescue therapy or setting limits and gently stops.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信