Suppr超能文献

医疗无效。纽约州医学协会生物伦理问题委员会。

Medical futility. Committee on Bioethical Issues of the Medical Society of the State of New York.

作者信息

Rosner F, Kark P R, Bennett A J, Buscaglia A, Cassell E J, Farnsworth P B, Halpern A L, Henry J B, Landolt A B, Loeb L

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Queens Hospital Center, Affiliation of the Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Jamaica, New York 11432.

出版信息

N Y State J Med. 1992 Nov;92(11):485-8.

PMID:1488204
Abstract

The term futile is used in many different ways. It is therefore difficult to decide whether a procedure or treatment such as CPR or hemodialysis or blood transfusion would be futile in a given case. The AMA's guidelines on the appropriate use of DNR orders state that DNR decisions should be made openly. Institutions should have policies and physicians should elicit the patient's preferences about CPR. For physicians, the question is no longer whether we should discuss DNR orders with our patients; instead, the issue is how to do so with compassion and caring. Physicians should share with patients their judgment about what medicine can and cannot do. Then physicians must "make decisions about when to withhold or limit resuscitation openly" in honest and trusting conversation between doctor and patient. Often CPR is an exercise in futility. The medical profession should be vested with the authority to make futility decisions if they are the product of open discussion and shared deliberation between physician and patient, family, or surrogate. Rationing, triage, and medical futility in relation to AIDS patients require careful deliberation and consideration. What was considered medically futile five years ago for an AIDS patient may be appropriate care nowadays. The need for appropriate use or non-use of life-sustaining therapy for the elderly, the terminally ill, patients with AIDS and other incurable illnesses is evident to patients, health care providers, policy makers, and the public. CPR should only be administered if it is expected to confer lasting benefit to the patient. However, if 10% of elderly patients benefit from CPR in the case of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, how can one consider this procedure futile? Although communication between physician and patient about difficult treatment limitation decisions has markedly improved in recent years, it remains a problem, largely because open dialogue with patients and families about futility is a demanding emotional and intellectual task. The medical profession is charged with setting standards for the proper implementation of judgments regarding futility.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

“无效”一词有多种不同的用法。因此,很难判定在某一特定情况下,诸如心肺复苏术(CPR)、血液透析或输血等程序或治疗是否无效。美国医学协会(AMA)关于适当使用“不要复苏”(DNR)医嘱的指南指出,DNR的决定应该公开做出。机构应有相关政策,医生应了解患者对心肺复苏术的偏好。对于医生来说,问题不再是我们是否应该与患者讨论DNR医嘱;相反,问题在于如何带着同情和关怀去做这件事。医生应该与患者分享他们对于医学所能做到和无法做到之事的判断。然后,医生必须在医患之间坦诚且互信的对话中“公开做出何时停止或限制复苏的决定”。通常情况下,心肺复苏术是一种徒劳之举。如果关于无效性的决定是医生与患者、家属或代理人之间公开讨论和共同商议得出的结果,那么医疗行业应该被赋予做出此类决定的权力。与艾滋病患者相关的资源分配、伤病员鉴别分类以及医疗无效性问题都需要仔细斟酌和考量。五年前被认为对艾滋病患者无效的医疗措施如今可能是恰当的治疗手段。对于老年人、绝症患者、艾滋病患者以及其他不治之症患者而言,合理使用或不使用维持生命疗法的必要性,患者、医疗服务提供者、政策制定者以及公众都有目共睹。只有当预计心肺复苏术能给患者带来持久益处时才应实施。然而,如果在院外心脏骤停的情况下,10%的老年患者能从心肺复苏术中获益,那又怎能认为这个程序是无效的呢?尽管近年来医生与患者之间关于艰难治疗限制决定的沟通已有显著改善,但这仍是个问题,很大程度上是因为与患者及其家属就无效性展开公开对话是一项要求颇高的情感及智力任务。医疗行业肩负着为正确实施关于无效性的判断设定标准的责任。(摘要截选至250词)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验