scholarly journals Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e032638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Moore ◽  
Karen M Detering ◽  
Tessa Low ◽  
Linda Nolte ◽  
Scott Fraser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Advance Care

ObjectiveAdvance care planning (ACP) assists people to identify their goals, values and treatment preferences for future care. Ideally, preferences are documented in an advance care directive (ACD) and used by doctors to guide medical decision-making should the patient subsequently lose their decision-making capacity. However, studies demonstrate that ACDs are not always adhered to by doctors in clinical practice. We aim to describe the attitudes and perspectives of doctors regarding ACD adherence and the utility of ACDs in clinical practice.DesignFace-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted using three case-based vignettes to explore doctors’ decision-making and attitudes towards ACDs. Transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis.SettingDoctors from a variety of medical specialties and with varying experience levels were recruited from a large tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia.ParticipantsA total of 21 doctors were interviewed, 48% female (10/21). Most (19/21) reported having experience using ACDs.ResultsFour themes were identified: aligning with patient preferences (avoiding unwanted care, prioritising autonomy and anticipating family opposition), advocating best interests (defining futile care, relying on clinical judgement, rejecting unreasonable decisions and disregarding legal consequences), establishing validity (doubting rigour of the decision-making process, questioning patients’ ability to understand treatment decisions, distrusting outdated preferences and seeking confirmation) and translating written preferences into practice (contextualising patient preferences, applying subjective terminology and prioritising emergency medical treatment).ConclusionsACDs provide doctors with opportunities to align patient preferences with treatment and uphold patient autonomy. However, doctors experience decisional conflict when attempting to adhere to ACDs in practice, especially when they believe that adhering to the ACD is not in the patients’ best interests, or if they doubt the validity of the ACD. Future ACP programmes should consider approaches to improve the validity and applicability of ACDs. In addition, there is a need for ethical and legal education to support doctors’ knowledge and confidence in ACP and enacting ACDs.

An introduction to advance care planning: practice at the frontline

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjali Mullick ◽  
Jonathan Martin
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Communication Skills ◽  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Use Case ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Practical Advice ◽  
Future Care ◽  
Case Vignettes ◽  
Advance Care

Advance care planning (ACP) is a process of formal decision-making that aims to help patients establish decisions about future care that take effect when they lose capacity. In our experience, guidance for clinicians rarely provides detailed practical advice on how it can be successfully carried out in a clinical setting. This may create a barrier to ACP discussions which might otherwise benefit patients, families and professionals. The focus of this paper is on sharing our experience of ACP as clinicians and offering practical tips on elements of ACP, such as triggers for conversations, communication skills, and highlighting the formal aspects that are potentially involved. We use case vignettes to better illustrate the application of ACP in clinical practice.

Of Love and Laetrile: Medical Decision Making in a Child's Best Interests

1979 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-294
Author(s):  
Eve T. Horwitz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
State Intervention ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
State Agency ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Appropriate Treatment ◽  
Life Threatening

AbstractTwo recent cases have raised important questions concerning the appropriateness of state intervention in parental choices of unorthodox medical treatment for children with life-threatening conditions. This Note first discusses whether, and if so, when, state intervention in a child's treatment selection by its parents is appropriate, and then analyzes the tests a court should apply in deciding upon an appropriate treatment. The Note recommends a decision-making approach that requires the appropriate state agency to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parents' choice of medical treatment either is directly or is indirectly harming their child. Under this approach, if the state meets its burden of proof the court then must apply the ‘best interests’ test, rather than the ‘substituted judgment’ test, to choose an appropriate medical treatment for the child.

The Contextual Nature of Critical Care Judgment

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilbert M. Goldman ◽  
Thyyar M. Ravindranath
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Formal Analysis ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Time Constraints ◽  
Care Decision

Critical care decision-making involves principles common to all medical decision-making. However, critical care is a remarkably distinctive form of clinical practice and therefore it may be useful to distinguish those elements particularly important or unique to ICU decision-making. The peculiar contextuality of critical care decision-making may be the best example of these elements. If so, attempts to improve our understanding of ICU decision-making may benefit from a formal analysis of its remarkable contextual nature. Four key elements of the context of critical care decisions can be identified: (1) costs, (2) time constraints, (3) the uncertain status of much clinical data, and (4) the continually changing environment of the ICU setting. These 4 elements comprise the context for the practice of clinical judgment in the ICU. The fact that intensivists are severely constrained by teh context of each case has important ramifications both for practice and for retrospective review. During retrospective review, the contextual nature of ICU judgment may be unfairly neglected by ignoring one or more of the key elements. Such neglect can be avoided if intensivists demand empathetic evaluation from reviewers.

Development of an aid to decision-making form (ADF) integrated into a major institutional program in oncology: A tool to support care goal identification.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18646-e18646
Author(s):  
Laurence Vigouret-Viant ◽  
Clemence Legoupil ◽  
Aurelie Bardet ◽  
Celine Laurent ◽  
Michel Ducreux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
P Value ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Advance Care ◽  
Aggressive Care

e18646 Background: For cancer patients, life-threatening complications may be difficult to anticipate, leading to complex medical decision-making processes. Since 2015, the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center has implemented a major institutional program including a Decision-Aid Form (ADF), outlining the anticipation of appropriate care for patient in case of worsening evolution. Methods: Between January and May 2017, all patients transferred from Site 1 to Site 2 of the hospital were prospectively included. In this study, we assessed the acceptability of the ADF, its using and its impact on the patient’s becoming. Results: Out of 206 patients included, 89.3% had an ADF. The planned stratification of care was notified in practically all cases. Conversely, the involvement of the palliative care team was notified in only 29% of the ADF. The value of the WHO/ECOG Performance Status was limited, varying between physicians. Finally, the field “information for patients and relatives” was insufficiently completed. Although a possible transfer to Intensive Care Unit was initially proposed in two-thirds of the patients, the majority (76%) of the 35 patients experiencing an acute event received exclusive medical or palliative care. The level of therapeutic commitment suggested by the ADF was never upgraded, and often revised towards less aggressive care, and especially without excess mortality for the patients who were initially designated to be eligible for intensive care. Moreover, the patient's survival at 6 months seems to be correlated with the anticipated level of care recorded on the FAD (Log-rank P value < 0,0001). Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that setting up a care stratification file in advance is possible in a French cultural setting and it could be helpful for clarifying prognosis assessment. To achieve complete acculturation, our extensive institutional program remains a cornerstone for the development of advance care planning. Since 2017, this program has widely spreaded ADF which is now integrated into the electronic medical record. Each physician can complete and modify the patient's ADF at any stage of the patient's disease course.

Bioethics in the field of pediatric surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-492
Author(s):  
Marko Bašković ◽  
Dora Škrljak Šoša
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Pediatric Surgery ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
The State ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Team Members

It is the professional responsibility of pediatric surgeons to follow the principles of maintaining life and alleviating suffering, often by questioning whether they have acted correctly. Apart from the moral dilemmas of choosing the best treatment strategies, they are often in dilemmas with the parents, who also involve their own “strategy” in the whole story, which they think is the most optimal treatment for their child, despite the contrary recommendations of the profession. Children, and especially adolescents, may be somewhat involved in medical decision making. Mostly the parent-physician-child / adolescent triangle agrees, but this is not always the case, which is why pediatric surgeons encounter problems. Ethical committees, composed of competent people, supported by the legal system of the state, who are able by consensus of team members to advocate and ensure the best interests of patients, must be activated for the full scope of the solution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document