Suppr超能文献

只是一组回忆:临床伦理咨询与评估声音的相互作用

Just a Collection of Recollections: Clinical Ethics Consultation and the Interplay of Evaluating Voices.

作者信息

Bartlett Virginia L, Bliton Mark J, Finder Stuart G

机构信息

Center for Healthcare Ethics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd - TSB 240, Los Angeles, CA, 90035, USA.

Medical Bioethics, Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, 4867 Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA, 90027, USA.

出版信息

HEC Forum. 2016 Dec;28(4):301-320. doi: 10.1007/s10730-016-9301-4.

Abstract

Despite increased attention to the question of how best to evaluate clinical ethics consultations and emphasis on external evaluation (Hastings Center Report, ASBH Quality Attestation Process), there has been little sustained focus on how we, as clinicians, make sense of and learn from our own experiences in the midst of any one consultation. Questions of how we evaluate the request for, unfolding of, and conclusion of any specific ethics consultation are often overlooked, along with the underlying question of whether it is possible to give an accurate account of clinical ethics consultants' experience as experienced by ethics consultants. Before the challenge of submitting one's accounts or case reports for review and evaluation from others (at one's local institution or in the broader field), there is an underlying challenge of understanding and evaluating our own accounts. To highlight this crucial and deeply challenging dimension of actual clinical ethics practice, we present an account of a complex consultation, explicitly constructed to engage the reader in the unfolding experience of the consultant by emphasizing the multiple perspectives unfolding within the consultant's experience. Written in script format, the three perspectives presented-prototypical clinically descriptive account; didactically reflective and self-evidentiary account often seen in journal presentations; highly self-critical reflective account emphasizing uncertainties inherent to clinical ethics practice-reflect different manners for responding to the ways actual clinical involvement in ethics consultation practice accentuates and refocuses the question of how to understand and evaluate our own work, as well as that of our colleagues.

摘要

尽管人们越来越关注如何最好地评估临床伦理会诊问题,并强调外部评估(《黑斯廷斯中心报告》、美国生物伦理学会质量认证程序),但对于我们临床医生如何在任何一次会诊过程中理解并从自身经历中学习,却很少有持续的关注。我们如何评估任何一次特定伦理会诊的请求、进展及结论的问题,往往被忽视,同时还有一个根本问题也被忽视了,即是否有可能准确描述伦理会诊顾问所经历的临床伦理会诊顾问的经验。在面临将自己的描述或病例报告提交给他人(在当地机构或更广泛领域)进行审查和评估的挑战之前,存在一个理解和评估我们自己描述的根本挑战。为了突出实际临床伦理实践中这一关键且极具挑战性的方面,我们呈现了一次复杂会诊的描述,通过强调会诊顾问经历中展开的多种观点,明确构建该描述以使读者参与到顾问的展开过程中。以脚本形式撰写,呈现的三个观点——典型的临床描述性叙述;在期刊展示中常见的具有教学反思性和自证性的叙述;强调临床伦理实践中固有不确定性的高度自我批评性反思叙述——反映了应对实际参与伦理会诊实践如何突出并重新聚焦如何理解和评估我们自己以及同事工作这一问题的不同方式。

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