Fried T R, Stein M D, O'Sullivan P S, Brock D W, Novack D H
Division of General Internal Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence.
Arch Intern Med. 1993 Mar 22;153(6):722-8. doi: 10.1001/archinte.153.6.722.
In making decisions about life-sustaining medical interventions, respect for patient autonomy has been widely advocated, yet little is known about what variables may compete with a physician's ability to honor patient requests in clinical situations. We investigated physician attitudes and behaviors about end-of-life decisions by means of a questionnaire that posed five hypothetical scenarios in which an elderly, competent, terminally ill patient made a request that, if agreed to by the physician, could result in the patient's death.
We surveyed 392 physicians in Rhode Island and asked them to decide (1) whether or not they would comply with a specific patient request, (2) the justifications they used in making their decision, and (3) whether they had been approached with such a request in their clinical practices.
Two hundred fifty-six physicians (65%) responded. Of the respondents, 98% agreed not to intubate the patient in the face of worsening respiratory failure. Eighty-six percent agreed to give the patient a dose of narcotics that could cause respiratory compromise and death to treat his pain adequately. Fifty-nine percent agreed, once the patient was intubated without hope of coming off the respirator, to turn the respirator off. Nine percent agreed to give the patient a prescription for an amount of sleeping pills that would be lethal if taken all at once. Only 1% agreed to give the patient a lethal injection. When they complied with patient requests, physicians cited patient autonomy as the principle most important to their decision making. Physicians who would not comply with patient requests also, paradoxically, often cited this principle but agreed with it less strongly; others cited concerns about the ethical nature of the request, legal questions, and the perception that they were "killing the patient." Sixty-five percent of respondents had been asked by patients to turn off a respirator, and 12% had been asked to administer lethal injections. Twenty-eight percent of respondents indicated that they would comply with requests for lethal injection more frequently if such an action were legal.
Difficult clinical decisions regarding potentially life-prolonging measures are commonly heard in clinical practice. Physicians value the concept of patient autonomy but place it in the context of other ethical and legal concerns and do not always accept specific actions derived from this principle.
在做出维持生命的医疗干预决策时,尊重患者自主权已得到广泛倡导,但对于在临床情况下哪些变量可能与医生尊重患者请求的能力相竞争,人们却知之甚少。我们通过一份问卷调查了医生对临终决策的态度和行为,该问卷提出了五个假设情景,情景中一位年老、有行为能力的绝症患者提出了一项请求,如果医生同意,可能导致患者死亡。
我们对罗德岛的392名医生进行了调查,要求他们决定:(1)是否会遵守患者的特定请求;(2)做出决定所使用的理由;(3)在临床实践中是否遇到过此类请求。
256名医生(65%)做出了回应。在受访者中,98%同意在患者呼吸衰竭恶化时不进行插管。86%同意给患者一剂可能导致呼吸功能不全和死亡的麻醉剂,以充分缓解其疼痛。59%同意,一旦患者插管且无望脱离呼吸机,关闭呼吸机。9%同意给患者开一定剂量的安眠药处方,一次性服用会致命。只有1%同意给患者注射致命药物。当他们遵守患者请求时,医生将患者自主权视为决策中最重要的原则。那些不遵守患者请求的医生,矛盾的是,也经常引用这一原则,但认同程度较低;其他人则提到对请求的伦理性质、法律问题的担忧,以及认为自己在“杀死患者”。65%的受访者曾被患者要求关闭呼吸机,12%曾被要求注射致命药物。28%的受访者表示,如果这种行为合法,他们会更频繁地遵守注射致命药物的请求。
关于可能延长生命措施的艰难临床决策在临床实践中很常见。医生重视患者自主权的概念,但将其置于其他伦理和法律考量的背景下,并不总是接受源自这一原则的具体行为。