Quill T E, Byock I R
Department of Medicine, The Genesee Hospital, Rochester, NY 14607, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Mar 7;132(5):408-14. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-132-5-200003070-00012.
When provided by a skilled, multidisciplinary team, palliative care is highly effective at addressing the physical, psychological, social, and spiritual needs of dying patients and their families. However, some patients who have witnessed harsh death want reassurance that they can escape if their suffering becomes intolerable. In addition, a small percentage of terminally ill patients receiving comprehensive care reach a point at which their suffering becomes severe and unacceptable despite unrestrained palliative efforts; some of these patients request that death be hastened. This paper presents terminal sedation and voluntary refusal of hydration and nutrition as potential last resorts that can be used to address the needs of such patients. These two practices allow clinicians to address a much wider range of intractable end-of-life suffering than physician-assisted suicide (even if it were legal) and can also provide alternatives for patients, families, and clinicians who are morally opposed to physician-assisted suicide. This paper will define the two practices, distinguish them from more standard palliative care interventions and from physician-assisted suicide, illustrate them with a real clinical scenario, provide potential guidelines and practicalities, and explore their moral and legal status. Although medicine cannot sanitize dying or provide perfect answers for all challenging end-of-life clinical problems, terminal sedation and voluntary refusal of hydration and nutrition substantially increase patients' choices at this inherently challenging time.
由专业的多学科团队提供时,姑息治疗在满足临终患者及其家属的身体、心理、社会和精神需求方面非常有效。然而,一些目睹过痛苦死亡过程的患者希望得到保证,如果他们的痛苦变得无法忍受,他们可以避免这种情况。此外,一小部分接受全面护理的绝症患者会达到这样一种状态:尽管进行了无限制的姑息治疗,他们的痛苦仍然变得严重且无法接受;其中一些患者要求加速死亡。本文介绍了终末期镇静以及自愿拒绝补充水分和营养,将其作为可用于满足此类患者需求的潜在最后手段。与医生协助自杀(即使其合法)相比,这两种做法使临床医生能够应对范围更广的棘手的临终痛苦,并且还能为在道德上反对医生协助自杀的患者、家属和临床医生提供替代方案。本文将对这两种做法进行定义,将它们与更标准的姑息治疗干预措施以及医生协助自杀区分开来,通过一个实际临床案例进行说明,提供潜在的指导方针和实际操作方法,并探讨它们的道德和法律地位。尽管医学无法使死亡变得轻松,也无法为所有具有挑战性的临终临床问题提供完美答案,但终末期镇静和自愿拒绝补充水分和营养在这个本质上具有挑战性的时刻极大地增加了患者的选择。