Mezey M, Mitty E, Rappaport M, Ramsey G
Division of Nursing, New York University, New York 10012, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997 Jan;45(1):43-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb00976.x.
To examine implementation of the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA), verbal directives, procedures for determination of resident' decision-making capacity, and role of ethics committees in nursing homes in New York City.
Telephone survey.
Social workers in 109 (69%) nursing homes in New York City.
An 80-item instrument addressing: (1) social worker knowledge of the PSDA; (2) informing residents about advance directives (living wills and durable power of attorney for health care [health care proxies]); (3) determination of decision-making capacity to be informed about advance directives; (4) estimates of advance directives executed; (5) perceptions of PSDA effect; (6) ethics committees; (7) follow-up and documentation; and (8) staff and community education.
Virtually all social workers in nursing homes stated that they made what they perceived to be a "serious effort" to inform residents about advance directives and to have residents execute directives (preferentially a health care proxy). More residents were thought to have executed a directive pursuant to the PSDA law than before the Act went into effect. Social workers in most homes informed residents about directives through face-to-face discussions. Most homes, however, did not inform residents who were thought to lack decision-making capacity about their right to execute a directive. Only 37% of homes had written procedures to determine a resident's decision-making capacity to be informed about directives; most homes relied on physician and social work assessments. Voluntary homes differed significantly from proprietary homes in that they were larger, more likely to have an ethics committee, and more aggressive in their implementation of the PSDA. Forty-five percent of homes with an ethics committee had written procedures for determination of resident decision-making capacity compared with 26% of homes without a committee. Overall, 24% of residents were thought to have executed an advance directive. The number of directives per bed did not vary significantly by facility size, ownership, religious affiliation, or whether they did or did not have an ethics committee.
The fact that social workers in nursing homes speak with most residents about advance directives has the potential to improve resident understanding around end of life decisions. The practice of not informing residents about advance directives when they are perceived to lack decision-making capacity is problematic given that most homes have no clear procedures for determining residents' cognitive capacity to execute a directive. There is a need to replicate the benefits achieved by homes with ethics committees in implementing the PSDA in other homes.
研究《患者自主决定法案》(PSDA)的实施情况、口头医嘱、确定居民决策能力的程序以及纽约市养老院伦理委员会的作用。
电话调查。
纽约市109家(69%)养老院的社会工作者。
一份包含80个条目的问卷,涉及:(1)社会工作者对PSDA的了解;(2)向居民告知预先医疗指示(生前遗嘱和医疗保健持久授权书[医疗保健代理人]);(3)确定被告知预先医疗指示的决策能力;(4)对已签署预先医疗指示的估计;(5)对PSDA效果的看法;(6)伦理委员会;(7)跟进与记录;以及(8)工作人员和社区教育。
几乎所有养老院的社会工作者都表示,他们做出了他们认为是“认真努力”的行为,向居民告知预先医疗指示并让居民签署指示(优先选择医疗保健代理人)。与该法案生效前相比,更多居民被认为根据PSDA法律签署了指示。大多数养老院的社会工作者通过面对面讨论向居民告知指示。然而,大多数养老院没有告知那些被认为缺乏决策能力的居民他们签署指示的权利。只有37%的养老院有书面程序来确定居民被告知指示的决策能力;大多数养老院依赖医生和社会工作评估。非营利性养老院与营利性养老院有显著差异,前者规模更大,更有可能设有伦理委员会,并且在实施PSDA方面更积极。设有伦理委员会的养老院中有45%有书面程序来确定居民的决策能力,而没有委员会的养老院这一比例为26%。总体而言,24%的居民被认为签署了预先医疗指示。每张床位的指示数量在机构规模、所有权、宗教归属或是否设有伦理委员会方面没有显著差异。
养老院的社会工作者与大多数居民谈论预先医疗指示这一事实有可能提高居民对临终决策的理解。鉴于大多数养老院没有明确的程序来确定居民签署指示的认知能力,在认为居民缺乏决策能力时不告知他们预先医疗指示的做法存在问题。有必要在其他养老院推广设有伦理委员会的养老院在实施PSDA方面所取得的成效。