Bosshard Georg, Fischer Susanne, van der Heide Agnes, Miccinesi Guido, Faisst Karin
Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2006 Jun;118(11-12):322-6. doi: 10.1007/s00508-006-0583-4.
This study aims to provide empirical data on physicians' intentions in withholding and withdrawing treatment, and to discuss possible implications for the ethical debate.
The data presented come from EURELD, a large research project designed to investigate medical end-of-life decisions in six European countries. A continuous random sample of death certificates formed the basis for contacting doctors who had attended the deceased; the doctors were asked to complete, strictly anonymously, mail questionnaires on the decisions taken at the end of their patients' lives.
In the six countries studied, physicians reported they had the explicit intention of hastening the end of life in 45% of all treatments that were withheld/ withdrawn. The highest numbers of cases with an underlying intention of hastening the end of life were found in Switzerland and Sweden (52% and 51%, respectively); the lowest figures came from Denmark and Belgium (36% and 38%). Middle-ranking countries were Italy (42%) and the Netherlands (45%). Overall, dialysis and respiration were comparatively more often forgone with the explicit intent to hasten the end of life (57% and 54%, respectively), whereas a particularly low percentage of cases with such an explicit intention was found for oncotherapy (34%).
In almost every second case, a medical decision to withhold or withdraw treatment is taken with the explicit intention of hastening the end of the patient's life. No clear association can be found between the intent to hasten the end of life and features of the treatment forgone that can be determined objectively, such as the likelihood and extent of a life-shortening effect, the immediacy of death, or the expected burden of any potential life-sustaining measure. The findings of the study challenge the usefulness of doctors' intentions with regard to hastening the end of life as criteria for moral judgements on decisions to withhold or withdraw medical treatment.
本研究旨在提供关于医生在停止和撤销治疗方面意图的实证数据,并讨论其对伦理辩论可能产生的影响。
所呈现的数据来自EURELD,这是一个大型研究项目,旨在调查六个欧洲国家的医疗临终决策。连续随机抽取的死亡证明样本构成了联系诊治过死者的医生的基础;要求医生严格匿名填写关于其患者临终时所做决策的邮寄问卷。
在所研究的六个国家中,医生报告称,在所有停止/撤销的治疗中,有45%的治疗他们有明确的加速患者死亡的意图。有加速死亡潜在意图的病例数在瑞士和瑞典最多(分别为52%和51%);最低数字来自丹麦和比利时(分别为36%和38%)。处于中间水平的国家是意大利(42%)和荷兰(45%)。总体而言,透析和呼吸相对更常因明确意图加速死亡而被放弃(分别为57%和54%),而有这种明确意图的肿瘤治疗病例比例特别低(34%)。
在几乎每第二个案例中,做出停止或撤销治疗的医疗决策时都有明确的加速患者死亡的意图。在加速死亡意图与可客观确定的被放弃治疗的特征之间,如缩短生命效果的可能性和程度、死亡的即时性或任何潜在维持生命措施的预期负担,未发现明显关联。该研究结果对将医生加速死亡的意图作为对停止或撤销医疗治疗决策进行道德判断的标准的有用性提出了质疑。