DuVal Gordon, Clarridge Brian, Gensler Gary, Danis Marion
Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Mar;19(3):251-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.21238.x.
To identify the ethical dilemmas that internists encounter, the strategies they use to address them, and the usefulness of ethics consultation.
National telephone survey.
Doctors' offices.
General internists, oncologists, and critical care/pulmonologists (N = 344, 64% response rate).
Types of ethical dilemmas recently encountered and likelihood of requesting ethics consultation; satisfaction with resolution of ethical dilemmas with and without ethics consultation.
Internists most commonly reported dilemmas regarding end-of-life decision making, patient autonomy, justice, and conflict resolution. General internists, oncologists, and critical care specialists reported participating in an average of 1.4, 1.3, and 4.1 consultations in the preceding 2 years, respectively (P <.0001). Physicians with the least ethics training had the least access to and participated in the fewest ethics consultations; 19% reported consultation was unavailable at their predominant practice site. Dilemmas about end-of-life decisions and patient autonomy were often referred for consultation, while dilemmas about justice, such as lack of insurance or limited resources, were rarely referred. While most physicians thought consultations yielded information that would be useful in dealing with future ethical dilemmas (72%), some hesitated to seek ethics consultation because they believed it was too time consuming (29%), might make the situation worse (15%), or that consultants were unqualified (11%).
While most internists recall recent ethical dilemmas in their practices, those with the least preparation and experience have the least access to ethics consultation. Health care organizations should emphasize ethics educational activities to prepare physicians for handling ethical dilemmas on their own and should improve the accessibility and responsiveness of ethics consultation when needed.
确定内科医生遇到的伦理困境、他们用于解决这些困境的策略以及伦理咨询的效用。
全国电话调查。
医生办公室。
普通内科医生、肿瘤学家以及重症监护/肺病专家(N = 344,回应率64%)。
近期遇到的伦理困境类型以及请求伦理咨询的可能性;对有和没有伦理咨询情况下伦理困境解决情况的满意度。
内科医生最常报告的困境涉及临终决策、患者自主权、公平以及冲突解决。普通内科医生、肿瘤学家和重症监护专家在前两年分别平均参与了1.4次、1.3次和4.1次咨询(P <.0001)。接受伦理培训最少的医生获得伦理咨询的机会最少且参与的咨询次数也最少;19%的医生报告在其主要执业地点无法获得咨询服务。关于临终决策和患者自主权的困境经常被提交咨询,而关于公平的困境,如缺乏保险或资源有限,很少被提交咨询。虽然大多数医生认为咨询能提供有助于应对未来伦理困境的信息(72%),但一些人因认为咨询太耗时(29%)、可能使情况更糟(15%)或咨询人员不合格(11%)而犹豫是否寻求伦理咨询。
虽然大多数内科医生回忆起近期在临床实践中遇到的伦理困境,但准备和经验最少的医生获得伦理咨询的机会最少。医疗保健机构应强调伦理教育活动,使医生能够自行应对伦理困境,并应在需要时提高伦理咨询的可及性和响应性。