Departments of Medicine and Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH; VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vt.
Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.
Am J Med. 2021 Aug;134(8):963-967. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.02.032. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
As dementia becomes more prevalent in the aging population, clinicians increasingly face the challenge of caring for patients who had told family members that they preferred death to life with advanced dementia. Advance directives can guide management, but usually are inadequate in caring for patients with advanced dementia. The "now" patient has very different sensibilities than the "then" patient who had expressed preferences for terminal care before dementia severely impaired cognition and executive function. Clinicians lack clear means of following a patient's directive to die rather than to live with advanced dementia. Withholding life-sustaining oral feeding or fluids is ethically problematic. Controversies remain over precedent autonomy as the justification for advance dementia directives, and the consequent legal, ethical, and practical issues clinicians face, particularly involving feeding.
随着痴呆症在老年人口中变得越来越普遍,临床医生越来越面临照顾那些曾告诉家人宁愿死也不愿患有晚期痴呆症的患者的挑战。预先指示可以指导管理,但在照顾患有晚期痴呆症的患者时通常是不够的。“现在”的患者与“那时”的患者有很大的不同,后者在痴呆症严重损害认知和执行功能之前,曾表示对终末护理的偏好。临床医生缺乏明确的方法来遵循患者的指令,即宁愿死于晚期痴呆症,也不愿继续生存。停止维持生命的口服喂养或补液在伦理上存在问题。作为预先制定痴呆症指令的理由的先例自主权,以及随之而来的法律、伦理和实际问题,特别是涉及喂养问题,仍然存在争议。