• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

重新定义医疗保健中的问责制:管理多元医疗利益

Redefining accountability in health care: managing the plurality of medical interests.

作者信息

Sorensen Roslyn, Iedema Rick

机构信息

University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Health (London). 2008 Jan;12(1):87-106. doi: 10.1177/1363459307083699.

DOI:10.1177/1363459307083699
PMID:18073248
Abstract

Conflict in health service delivery is common. It is often attributed to disputes between clinicians and patients or their families about treatment decisions and is particularly common in intensive care units (ICUs), in the form of ;futility disputes' between families and medical clinicians about decisions to terminate the active treatment of a dying family member. More common, but less prominent in the literature, is conflict within the medical profession about patient care goals and treatment. We contend that managing the plurality of medical interests is essential in achieving a more managed and positive experience for patients and families of the care they receive, and for achieving standards of quality and resource use. From an ethnographic study undertaken in a large ICU in Sydney, Australia, we found that the knowledge and practice differences of multiple medical decision-makers generated conflict, inconsistency of practice and subjectivity of decision-making that impeded coherent clinical decision-making and integrated patient care planning, coordination and care review. Improving patients' and families' experience of care requires medical clinicians and medical managers to accept responsibility for institutionalizing effective communication and decision-making processes within clinical networks and between clinical and managerial domains. Thus, strategies to improve patient care will need to extend beyond the medical profession to incorporate administrative management. We conclude that restructuring communication and decision-making processes is imperative to achieve clinical accountability in the workplace and systems accountability in the organization.

摘要

医疗服务提供中的冲突很常见。它通常归因于临床医生与患者或其家属之间关于治疗决策的争议,在重症监护病房(ICU)尤为常见,表现为家属与医疗临床医生之间就终止对濒死家庭成员的积极治疗的决策产生的“无效性争议”。在医学专业内部,关于患者护理目标和治疗的冲突更为常见,但在文献中不太突出。我们认为,管理多种医学利益对于为患者及其家属提供更有序、更积极的就医体验,以及实现质量标准和资源利用至关重要。通过在澳大利亚悉尼一家大型ICU进行的人种志研究,我们发现多个医疗决策者的知识和实践差异产生了冲突、实践的不一致性以及决策的主观性,这阻碍了连贯的临床决策以及综合的患者护理规划、协调和护理审查。改善患者及其家属的就医体验需要医疗临床医生和医疗管理人员承担责任,在临床网络内部以及临床和管理领域之间将有效的沟通和决策流程制度化。因此,改善患者护理的策略需要超越医学专业,纳入行政管理。我们得出结论,重组沟通和决策流程对于在工作场所实现临床问责制以及在组织中实现系统问责制至关重要。

相似文献

1
Redefining accountability in health care: managing the plurality of medical interests.重新定义医疗保健中的问责制:管理多元医疗利益
Health (London). 2008 Jan;12(1):87-106. doi: 10.1177/1363459307083699.
2
Role of clinical ethicists in making decisions about levels of care in the intensive care unit.临床伦理学家在重症监护病房护理级别决策中的作用。
Crit Care Nurse. 2009 Apr;29(2):77-84. doi: 10.4037/ccn2009285.
3
Advocacy at end-of-life research design: an ethnographic study of an ICU.临终研究设计中的倡导:对一家重症监护病房的人种志研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2007 Nov;44(8):1343-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.07.019. Epub 2006 Sep 15.
4
Medical hegemony in decision-making--a barrier to interdisciplinary working in intensive care?决策中的医学霸权——重症监护跨学科合作的障碍?
J Adv Nurs. 2004 May;46(3):245-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.02984.x.
5
Surgeons, intensivists, and the covenant of care: administrative models and values affecting care at the end of life--Updated.外科医生、重症监护医生与护理契约:影响临终护理的管理模式与价值观——更新版
Crit Care Med. 2003 May;31(5):1551-7; discussion 1557-9.
6
Bridging the accountability gap.弥合问责差距。
J Soc Health Syst. 1991;2(3):52-8.
7
Life support withdrawal: communication and conflict.生命支持撤除:沟通与冲突
Am J Crit Care. 2003 Nov;12(6):548-55.
8
Where do we go from here? A palliative care perspective.从这里我们将何去何从?姑息治疗视角。
Crit Care Med. 2006 Nov;34(11 Suppl):S416-20. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000237345.62823.82.
9
Communicating with patients and their families about advance care planning and end-of-life care.就预先医疗计划和临终关怀与患者及其家属进行沟通。
Respir Care. 2000 Nov;45(11):1385-94; discussion 1394-8.
10
End-of-life decision making in the ICU.重症监护病房中的临终决策
Clin Chest Med. 2009 Mar;30(1):181-94, x. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2008.11.002.

引用本文的文献

1
Maintaining a medical institution in a context of materiality change: Lessons from a Canadian university hospital.在物质变化的背景下维持医疗机构:来自加拿大大学医院的经验教训。
Health (London). 2023 Nov;27(6):1135-1154. doi: 10.1177/13634593221109680. Epub 2022 Jul 5.
2
How can technology support quality improvement? Lessons learned from the adoption of an analytics tool for advanced performance measurement in a hospital unit.技术如何支持质量改进?从在医院单元采用高级绩效测量分析工具中学到的经验教训。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Sep 1;20(1):816. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05622-7.
3
Medical leadership: boon or barrier to organisational performance? A thematic synthesis of the literature.
医学领导力:对组织绩效是福音还是障碍?文献的主题综合分析。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jul 21;10(7):e035542. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035542.
4
"What families want - an assessment of family expectations in the ICU".《家庭所需——重症监护病房中家庭期望的评估》
Int Arch Med. 2011 Jun 22;4:21. doi: 10.1186/1755-7682-4-21.