• 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

“不要复苏”(DNR)医嘱与智障患者的案例。

The case of Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) orders and the intellectually disabled patient.

作者信息

Leever Martin G, Richter Kenneth, Nelson Peg, Allman Christopher J, Wyeth Duncan

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, University of Detroit Mercy, Detroit, MI, USA.

出版信息

HEC Forum. 2012 Jun;24(2):83-90. doi: 10.1007/s10730-011-9166-5.

DOI:10.1007/s10730-011-9166-5
PMID:21972085
Abstract

In the case of an intellectually disabled patient, the attending physician was restricted from writing a Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) order. Although the rationale for this restriction was to protect the patient from an inappropriate quality of life judgment, it resulted in a worse death than the patient would have experienced had he not been disabled. Such restrictions that are intended to protect intellectually disabled patients may violate their right to equal treatment and to a dignified death.

摘要

对于智障患者,主治医生被限制开具“不要复苏”(DNR)医嘱。尽管实施这一限制的理由是保护患者免受不恰当的生活质量判断,但这导致患者的死亡比他未残疾时所经历的更加糟糕。此类旨在保护智障患者的限制可能侵犯他们获得平等治疗以及尊严死的权利。

相似文献

1
The case of Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) orders and the intellectually disabled patient.“不要复苏”(DNR)医嘱与智障患者的案例。
HEC Forum. 2012 Jun;24(2):83-90. doi: 10.1007/s10730-011-9166-5.
2
Do not resuscitate (DNR): analysis of the DNR act.
J Okla State Med Assoc. 1999 Jul;92(7):316-9.
3
Physician workload associated with do-not-resuscitate decision-making in intensive care units: an observational study using Cox proportional hazards analysis.使用 Cox 比例风险分析观察研究重症监护病房中不复苏决策与医师工作量的关系。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Mar 1;20(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0355-0.
4
The case of the coercive family.强制家庭的案例。
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 1994 Winter;3(1):135-6; discussion 136-42.
5
Physicians' obligations to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment.医生在停止或撤销维持生命的医疗治疗方面的义务。
R I Med. 1994 Nov;77(11):387-9.
6
Physician authority for unilateral DNR orders.医生下达单方面“不要复苏”医嘱的权限。
J Leg Med. 1991 Jun;12(2):115-65. doi: 10.1080/01947649109510849.
7
The training in SHARE communication course by physicians increases the signing of do-not-resuscitate orders for critical patients in the emergency room (cross-sectional study).医生在 SHARE 沟通课程中的培训增加了急诊科危急患者的不复苏医嘱签署率(横断面研究)。
Int J Surg. 2019 Aug;68:20-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.06.005. Epub 2019 Jun 8.
8
The role of audit in making do not resuscitate decisions.审核在做出不进行心肺复苏决策中的作用。
J Eval Clin Pract. 1999 Aug;5(3):305-12. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1999.00144.x.
9
Are physicians on the same page about do-not-resuscitate? To examine individual physicians' influence on do-not-resuscitate decision-making: a retrospective and observational study.医师对于是否实施心肺复苏术的意见一致吗?为了研究个体医师对是否实施心肺复苏术决策的影响:一项回顾性和观察性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Dec 4;20(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0429-z.
10
The do-not-resuscitate order: associations with advance directives, physician specialty and documentation of discussion 15 years after the Patient Self-Determination Act.“不要复苏”医嘱:与预先指示、医生专业以及《患者自主决定法案》实施15年后讨论记录的关联
J Med Ethics. 2008 Sep;34(9):642-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.022517.

本文引用的文献

1
Toward a theory of process.迈向过程理论。
Law Med Health Care. 1992 Winter;20(4):278-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1992.tb01204.x.
2
An intensive communication intervention for the critically ill.针对重症患者的强化沟通干预。
Am J Med. 2000 Oct 15;109(6):469-75. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(00)00524-6.
3
Who's to choose? Surrogate decisionmaking in New York State.该由谁来做选择?纽约州的替代决策制定。
Hastings Cent Rep. 1993 Jan-Feb;23(1):5-11.