Wrigley Anthony
J Med Ethics. 2015 Aug;41(8):639-43. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101780. Epub 2014 May 21.
The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying has recently been the topic of substantial media interest and also been subject to the independent Neuberger Review. This review has identified clear failings in some areas of care and recommended the Liverpool Care Pathway be phased out. I argue that while the evidence gathered of poor incidences of practice by the Review is of genuine concern for end of life care, the inferences drawn from this evidence are inconsistent with the causes for the concern. Seeking to end an approach that is widely seen as best practice and which can genuinely deliver high quality care because of negative impressions that have been formed from failing to implement it properly is not a good basis for radically overhauling our approach to end of life care. I conclude that improvements in training, communication and ethical decision-making, without the added demand to end the Liverpool Care Pathway, would have resulted in a genuine advance in end of life care.
《利物浦临终关怀路径》最近成为媒体大量关注的话题,并且也受到了独立的纽伯格审查。该审查已确定在某些护理领域存在明显不足,并建议逐步淘汰《利物浦临终关怀路径》。我认为,虽然审查所收集的关于不良实践发生率的证据确实令人担忧临终关怀,但从这一证据得出的推论与引发担忧的原因并不一致。由于未能正确实施而形成负面印象,就试图终止一种被广泛视为最佳实践且能真正提供高质量护理的方法,这并非彻底改革我们临终关怀方法的良好依据。我得出的结论是,在不额外要求终止《利物浦临终关怀路径》的情况下,改善培训、沟通和道德决策,本可在临终关怀方面取得真正进展。