Suppr超能文献

为肌萎缩侧索硬化症患者启动和停止呼吸机

Starting and stopping the ventilator for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

作者信息

Goldblatt D, Greenlaw J

机构信息

University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York.

出版信息

Neurol Clin. 1989 Nov;7(4):789-806.

PMID:2586401
Abstract

Only a minority of patients who have ALS require, request, and receive assisted or supported ventilation. Usually, when a mechanical ventilator is needed, nonsurgical methods can be used for prolonged periods of time. Appropriately timed discussions can reduce the need for emergency management of breathing failure. The doctrine of informed consent applies to decisions about life support. It involves both the physician (to exercise clinical judgment on behalf of the patient) and the patient (to make personal decisions). They must interact. The patient's firm decision must be clear but need not be in the form of a "living will," and it does not need to be sought repeatedly or reiterated endlessly. Just as a considered decision cannot be arbitrarily overthrown in a time of crisis, neither can a change of mind be willfully ignored. In practice, this may test the capability of even the most experienced and understanding physician, and may result in less-than-ideal outcomes, as our examples show. As in any other area of medical practice, personal experience teaches valuable lessons. Unfortunately, even extended publications discussing clinical management of ALS have failed to address the subject of discontinuing ventilatory support, and ethicists have not always been helpful. Bernat and Beresford have, however, successfully summarized the ethical issues involved. Failure to sustain breathing mechanically or withdrawing artificial support of breathing from a requesting patient who, in the terminal stage of ALS, has become unable to breathe without a mechanical ventilator cannot be called assisted suicide, mercy killing, or either passive or active euthanasia. It is allowing a competent person to die naturally of the incurable illness that afflicts him. The state has no legal interests to be served by intervening in the process just described, which bears no relationship to issues of malpractice, much less to criminal negligence or homicide. Neurologists have not uniformly understood these points, as demonstrated by previous publications addressing the issue and by the findings of our own survey of neurologists who have special experience in the area of neuromuscular diseases. In regard both to starting and to stopping the ventilator, we believe strongly that it is time to lay aside the moral, legal, and ethical conflicts that have needlessly delayed or prevented physicians from complying with the resolute decisions that competent patients have made about their own lives. We urge doctors to act in these cases, as in all others, with their best medical judgment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

摘要

只有少数肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)患者需要、请求并接受辅助通气或支持通气。通常,当需要使用机械通气时,非手术方法可长期使用。适时进行讨论可减少呼吸衰竭紧急处理的需求。知情同意原则适用于关于生命支持的决策。这涉及医生(代表患者行使临床判断)和患者(做出个人决策),他们必须相互交流。患者的坚定决定必须明确,但不一定采取“生前预嘱”的形式,也无需反复征求或无休止地重申。正如深思熟虑的决定在危机时刻不能被随意推翻一样,患者改变主意也不能被故意忽视。在实践中,这可能会考验即使是最有经验、最善解人意的医生的能力,正如我们的例子所示,可能会导致不太理想的结果。与任何其他医疗实践领域一样,个人经验能传授宝贵的经验教训。不幸的是,即使是讨论ALS临床管理的长篇出版物也未能涉及停止通气支持这一主题,伦理学家也并非总能提供帮助。然而,伯纳特和贝雷斯福德成功总结了其中涉及的伦理问题。对于处于ALS晚期、没有机械通气就无法呼吸的请求患者,不给予机械通气支持或撤掉人工呼吸支持,不能被称为协助自杀、安乐死,也不能被称为消极或积极的安乐死。这是允许一个有行为能力的人自然死于折磨他的不治之症。国家没有法律利益去干预上述过程,这与医疗事故问题无关,更与刑事过失或杀人无关。正如以往关于该问题的出版物以及我们自己对在神经肌肉疾病领域有特殊经验神经科医生的调查结果所示,神经科医生对这些观点的理解并不一致。关于启动和停止通气,我们坚信,是时候抛开那些不必要地拖延或阻碍医生遵守有行为能力的患者对自己生命所做坚定决定的道德、法律和伦理冲突了。我们敦促医生在这些情况下,如同在所有其他情况下一样,运用他们最佳的医学判断力行事。(摘要截选至400字)

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