1 Instituto de Bioética , Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Porto, Portugal .
2 UNESCO Chair in Bioethics, Instituto de Bioética , Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Porto, Portugal .
J Palliat Med. 2018 May;21(5):604-615. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2017.0403. Epub 2018 Jan 3.
End-of-life decisions (ELDs) are embedded in clinical, sociocultural, political, economic, and ethical concerns. In 2014, the Council of Europe (CoE) through its Committee on Bioethics launched the "Guide on the decision-making process regarding medical treatment in end-of-life situations," aiming at improving decision-making processes and empowering professionals in making ELDs.
To analyze if end-of-life decision making in palliative care (PC) is consistent with this Guide and to identify if disputed/controversial issues are part of current ELDs.
Qualitative secondary analysis.
SETTING/SUBJECTS: Four qualitative datasets, including 44 interviews and 9 team observation field notes from previous studies with PC teams/professionals in Portugal.
An analysis grid based on the abovementioned guide was created considering three dimensions: ethical and legal frameworks, decision-making process, and disputed/controversial issues.
The majority of the professionals considered the ethical principle of autonomy paramount in end-of-life decision making. Justice and beneficence/nonmaleficence were also valued. Although not mentioned in the Guide, the professionals also considered other ethical principles when making ELDs, namely, responsibility, integrity, and dignity. Most of the interviewees and field notes referred to the collective interprofessional dimension of the decision-making process. Palliative sedation and the wish to hasten death were the most mentioned disputed/controversial issues. The nature, limitations, and benefits of qualitative secondary analysis are discussed.
End-of-life decision-making processes made by Portuguese PC teams seem to be consistent with the guidelines of the CoE. Further research is needed about disputed/controversial issues and the actual use, effectiveness, and impact of ethical guidelines for end-of-life decision making on professionals' empowerment and for all parties involved.
临终决策(ELDs)涉及临床、社会文化、政治、经济和伦理等多方面的问题。2014 年,欧洲理事会(CoE)通过其生物伦理委员会发布了《关于生命末期医疗决策的指南》,旨在改善决策过程并赋予专业人员进行 ELDs 的权力。
分析姑息治疗(PC)中的临终决策是否符合该指南,并确定有争议/有争议的问题是否属于当前的 ELDs。
定性二次分析。
设置/研究对象:四个定性数据集,包括葡萄牙 44 次访谈和 9 次团队观察现场记录,这些数据来自之前关于 PC 团队/专业人员的研究。
根据上述指南创建了一个分析网格,考虑了三个维度:伦理和法律框架、决策过程和有争议/有争议的问题。
大多数专业人员认为,在临终决策中,自主的伦理原则是最重要的。正义和有利/无害也受到重视。尽管指南中没有提到,但专业人员在进行 ELDs 时也考虑了其他伦理原则,即责任、正直和尊严。大多数访谈者和现场记录都提到了决策过程的集体跨专业维度。姑息性镇静和加速死亡的愿望是最常提到的有争议/有争议的问题。讨论了定性二次分析的性质、局限性和益处。
葡萄牙 PC 团队的临终决策过程似乎符合 CoE 的指南。需要进一步研究有争议/有争议的问题以及伦理指南对专业人员赋权的实际使用、有效性和影响,以及对所有相关方的影响。