Gielen Joris, Bhatnagar Sushma, Mishra Seema, Chaturvedi Arvind K, Gupta Harmala, Rajvanshi Ambika, Van den Branden Stef, Broeckaert Bert
Interdisciplinary Centre for the Study of Religion and World View (Catholic University Leuven), Sint-Michielsstraat 4-Bus 3101, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Med Health Care Philos. 2011 Feb;14(1):5-18. doi: 10.1007/s11019-010-9273-0.
Decisions to withdraw or withhold curative or life-sustaining treatment can have a huge impact on the symptoms which the palliative-care team has to control. Palliative-care patients and their relatives may also turn to palliative-care physicians and nurses for advice regarding these treatments. We wanted to assess Indian palliative-care nurses and physicians' attitudes towards withholding and withdrawal of curative or life-sustaining treatment.
From May to September 2008, we interviewed 14 physicians and 13 nurses working in different palliative-care programmes in New Delhi, using a semi-structured questionnaire. For the interviews and analysis of the data we followed Grounded-Theory methodology.
Withholding a curative or life-sustaining treatment which may prolong a terminal cancer patient's life with a few weeks but also has severe side-effects was generally considered acceptable by the interviewees. The majority of the interviewees agreed that life-sustaining treatments can be withdrawn in a patient who is in an irreversible coma. The palliative-care physicians and nurses were of the opinion that a patient has the right to refuse life-saving curative treatment. While reflecting upon the ethical acceptability of withholding or withdrawal of curative or life-sustaining treatment, the physicians and nurses were concerned about the whole patient and other people who may be affected by the decision. They were convinced they can play an important advisory role in the decision-making process.
While deciding about the ethical issues, the physicians and nurses do not restrict their considerations to the physical aspects of the disease, but also reflect upon the complex wider consequences of the treatment decisions.
决定停止或不进行治愈性或维持生命的治疗,可能会对姑息治疗团队需要控制的症状产生巨大影响。姑息治疗患者及其亲属也可能就这些治疗向姑息治疗医生和护士寻求建议。我们希望评估印度姑息治疗护士和医生对停止和撤销治愈性或维持生命治疗的态度。
2008年5月至9月,我们使用半结构化问卷对在新德里不同姑息治疗项目工作的14名医生和13名护士进行了访谈。对于访谈和数据分析,我们采用了扎根理论方法。
受访者普遍认为,停止一种可能使晚期癌症患者生命延长几周但也有严重副作用的治愈性或维持生命的治疗是可以接受的。大多数受访者同意,对于处于不可逆昏迷状态的患者,可以撤销维持生命的治疗。姑息治疗医生和护士认为,患者有权拒绝挽救生命的治愈性治疗。在思考停止或撤销治愈性或维持生命治疗的伦理可接受性时,医生和护士关注的是整个患者以及可能受该决定影响的其他人。他们确信自己可以在决策过程中发挥重要的咨询作用。
在决定伦理问题时,医生和护士不仅将考虑局限于疾病的身体方面,还会思考治疗决定带来的更广泛的复杂后果。