Suppr超能文献

何时停止?当儿童癌症治疗不再具有治愈性时的决策制定:一项混合方法系统评价。

When to stop? Decision-making when children's cancer treatment is no longer curative: a mixed-method systematic review.

机构信息

Health Research Council of the Mexican Institute of Social Security, Centro Medico Nacional Siglo XXI, Av, Cuauhtemoc # 330, Col, Doctores, C,P, Mexico 06720 D,F, Mexico.

出版信息

BMC Pediatr. 2014 May 13;14:124. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-14-124.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Children with cancer, parents, and clinicians, face difficult decisions when cure is no longer possible. Little is known about decision-making processes, how agreement is reached, or perspectives of different actors. Professionals voice concerns about managing parental expectations and beliefs, which can be contrary to their own and may change over time. We conducted the first systematic review to determine what constitutes best medico-legal practice for children under 19 years as context to exploring the perspectives of actors who make judgements and decisions when cancer treatment is no longer curative.

METHODS

Theory-informed mixed-method thematic systematic review with theory development.

RESULTS

Eight legal/ethical guidelines and 18 studies were included. Whilst there were no unresolved dilemmas, actors had different perspectives and motives. In line with guidelines, the best interests of the individual child informed decisions, although how different actors conceptualized 'best interests' when treatment was no longer curative varied. Respect for autonomy was understood as following child/parent preferences, which varied from case to case. Doctors generally shared information so that parents alone could make an informed decision. When parents received reliable information, and personalized interest in their child, they were more likely to achieve shared trust and clearer transition to palliation. Although under-represented in research studies, young people's perspectives showed some differences to those of parents and professionals. For example, young people preferred to be informed even when prognosis was poor, and they had an altruistic desire to help others by participating in research.

CONCLUSION

There needs to be fresh impetus to more effectively and universally implement the ethics of professionalism into daily clinical practice in order to reinforce humanitarian attitudes. Ethical guidelines and regulations attempt to bring professionals together by articulating shared values. While important, ethics training must be supported by institutions/organizations to assist doctors to maintain good professional standards. Findings will hopefully stimulate further normative and descriptive lines of research in this complex under-researched field. Future research needs to be undertaken through a more deliberative cultural lens that includes children's and multi-disciplinary team members' perspectives to more fully characterize and understand the dynamics of the decision-making process in this specific end-of life context.

摘要

背景

当治愈不再可能时,患有癌症的儿童、家长和临床医生面临着艰难的决策。人们对决策过程、如何达成共识以及不同角色的观点知之甚少。专业人士对管理家长的期望和信念表示担忧,这些期望和信念可能与他们自己的期望和信念相悖,而且可能会随着时间的推移而改变。我们进行了首次系统评价,以确定 19 岁以下儿童的最佳医学法律实践,作为探索在癌症治疗不再具有治愈性时做出判断和决策的行为者观点的背景。

方法

理论启发式混合方法主题系统评价与理论发展。

结果

纳入了 8 项法律/伦理准则和 18 项研究。虽然没有未解决的困境,但行为者有不同的观点和动机。根据准则,个体儿童的最佳利益决定了决策,尽管当治疗不再具有治愈性时,不同行为者对“最佳利益”的概念化有所不同。尊重自主权被理解为遵循儿童/家长的偏好,这些偏好因案例而异。医生通常会提供信息,以便家长可以做出知情决策。当父母获得可靠的信息,并对自己的孩子有个性化的兴趣时,他们更有可能建立共同的信任,并更清楚地过渡到姑息治疗。尽管在研究中代表性不足,但年轻人的观点与家长和专业人士的观点有些不同。例如,即使预后不佳,年轻人也希望得到通知,他们有一种利他主义的愿望,希望通过参与研究来帮助他人。

结论

需要为更有效地将专业精神的伦理原则普遍应用于日常临床实践提供新的动力,以加强人道主义态度。伦理准则和法规试图通过表达共同的价值观将专业人员聚集在一起。虽然很重要,但伦理培训必须得到机构/组织的支持,以帮助医生保持良好的专业标准。研究结果有望激发在这个复杂的研究不足的领域进一步开展规范性和描述性研究。未来的研究需要通过更具审议性的文化视角进行,该视角包括儿童和多学科团队成员的观点,以更全面地描述和理解这一特定生命末期背景下决策过程的动态。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/410f/4028290/35258246b8c5/1471-2431-14-124-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验