Lo Bernard, Rubenfeld Gordon
Program in Medical Ethics and the Division of General Internal Medicine in the Department of Medicine at the University of California San Francisco, USA.
JAMA. 2005 Oct 12;294(14):1810-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.14.1810.
Despite skilled palliative care, some dying patients experience distressing symptoms that cannot be adequately relieved. A patient with metastatic breast cancer, receiving high doses of opioids administered to relieve pain, developed myoclonus. After other approaches proved ineffective, palliative sedation was an option of last resort. The doctrine of double effect, the traditional justification for palliative sedation, permits physicians to provide high doses of opioids and sedatives to relieve suffering, provided that the intention is not to cause the patient's death and that certain other conditions are met. Such high doses are permissible even if the risk of hastening death is foreseen. Because intention plays a key role in this doctrine, clinicians must understand and document which actions are consistent with an intention to relieve symptoms rather than to hasten death. The patient or family should agree with plans for palliative sedation. The attending physician needs to explain to them, as well as to the medical and nursing staff, the details of care and the justification for palliative sedation. Because cases involving palliative sedation are emotionally stressful, the patient, family, and health care workers can all benefit from talking about the complex medical, ethical, and emotional issues they raise.
尽管有专业的姑息治疗,但一些临终患者仍会经历无法得到充分缓解的痛苦症状。一名转移性乳腺癌患者在接受高剂量阿片类药物以缓解疼痛时出现了肌阵挛。在其他方法被证明无效后,姑息性镇静成为了最后的选择。双重效应原则是姑息性镇静的传统正当理由,它允许医生提供高剂量的阿片类药物和镇静剂以缓解痛苦,前提是其意图不是导致患者死亡且满足某些其他条件。即使预见到加速死亡的风险,这种高剂量也是允许的。由于意图在这一原则中起着关键作用,临床医生必须理解并记录哪些行为符合缓解症状而非加速死亡的意图。患者或家属应同意姑息性镇静计划。主治医生需要向他们以及医护人员解释护理细节和姑息性镇静的理由。由于涉及姑息性镇静的病例在情感上压力很大,患者、家属和医护人员都能从讨论这些病例所引发的复杂医学、伦理和情感问题中受益。