Bosslet Gabriel T, Lo Bernard, White Douglas B
Perspect Biol Med. 2018;60(3):314-318. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2018.0002.
The word futile has been a touchstone in debates regarding resolution of disputes regarding life-prolonging treatments since the 1980s. Here, we respond to several criticisms of the Multiorganization Policy Statement, "An Official ATS/AACN/ACCP/ESICM/SCCM Policy Statement: Responding to Requests for Potentially Inappropriate Treatments in Intensive Care Units" (Bosslet et al. 2015). This response highlights the need for a strict definition of the word futile in order to avoid undue treatment differences when end-of-life interventions are contested. We also reply to several criticisms of this policy statement that are formulated upon fundamental misunderstandings of the statement and its assertions.
自20世纪80年代以来,“无效”一词一直是关于延长生命治疗争议解决辩论的试金石。在此,我们回应了对多组织政策声明《美国胸科协会/美国危重症护理协会/美国胸科医师学会/欧洲重症监护医学学会/危重症医学会官方政策声明:应对重症监护病房中潜在不适当治疗的请求》(博斯莱特等人,2015年)的若干批评。本回应强调了对“无效”一词进行严格定义的必要性,以便在临终干预存在争议时避免不适当的治疗差异。我们还回应了基于对该政策声明及其主张的根本误解而对其提出的若干批评。