How to approach major surgery where patients refuse blood transfusion (including Jehovah's Witnesses).
(65/306)
Jehovah's Witnesses do not permit the use of allogeneic blood products. An increasing number of patients are refusing blood transfusion for non-religious reasons. In addition, blood stores are decreasing, and costs are increasing. Transfusion avoidance strategies are, therefore, desirable. Bloodless surgery refers to the co-ordinated peri-operative care of patients aiming to avoid blood transfusion, and improve patient outcomes. These principles are likely to gain popularity, and become standard practice for all patients. This review offers a practical approach to the surgical management of Jehovah's Witnesses, and an introduction to the principles of bloodless surgery that can be applied to the management of all patients. (+info)
Psychiatric advance directives: qualitative study of informed deliberations by mental health service users.
(66/306)
BACKGROUND: Established legal mandates and high expectations for psychiatric advance directives are not matched by empirical evidence documenting their actual implementation. AIMS: To explore the interests, concerns and planning activities of informed mental health service users contemplating such directives. METHOD: Standard qualitative research techniques were used: field observations, interviews, focus groups, archival research and key informant interviews; 33 persons participated in the interviews and focus groups. Transcripts were coded and analysed for thematic content, and results were member-checked. RESULTS: Training set in motion labour-intensive projects: conceptualising how a psychiatric advance directive would work in one's life, mobilising resources, reviewing past experiences and assessing risks. Especially meaningful was the prospect of being treated as a responsible agent in future interactions with the mental health system. CONCLUSIONS: Advance directives are best thought of as complex planning tools for future psychiatric crisis management, rather than focal interventions to enhance compliance. Research is needed to explore the institutional response to this prospective decision-sharing initiative. (+info)
Nephrologists' experience with and attitudes towards decisions to forego dialysis. The End-Stage Renal Disease Network of New England.
(67/306)
Ethicists and lawyers agree that competent adult patients or their surrogate decision-makers have the right to forego life-sustaining treatment, but the views of practicing physicians have not been well-studied. To examine nephrologists' experience with and attitudes towards decisions to forego dialysis, a questionnaire was sent to all 161 nephrologists performing chronic dialysis in six New England states; 118 (73%) responded. The proportion of nephrologists who reported withholding (not starting) dialysis from the cited numbers of patients during the previous year was 11%, 0; 58%, 1 to 5; 20%, 6 to 10; 8%, 11 to 15; and 3%, greater than or equal to 16. For withdrawing (stopping), the proportions were 19%, 0; 73%, 1 to 5; 9%, 6 to 10; and 0%, greater than or equal to 11. The nephrologists withheld dialysis more times than they withdrew it (chi 2 = 26; P = 0.004). If requested to do so by a competent patient, 88% of nephrologists would stop dialysis. If requested by the family of an incompetent patient, 90% would stop if the patient had clear prior wishes, but only 63% would stop if prior wishes were unclear. With competent patients, the issue of withdrawal of dialysis was usually raised by the patient (56%). With incompetent patients, the issue was raised by the family (42%) or nephrologist (30%). It was concluded that decisions to withhold dialysis are more frequent than decisions to withdraw it. Moreover, nephrologists agree about the management of requests to withdraw dialysis in competent patients or incompetent patients with clear prior wishes; they disagree about the management of incompetent patients with unclear prior wishes.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) (+info)
Family physicians' attitudes toward advance directives.
(68/306)
OBJECTIVE: To examine the attitudes toward, the experience with and the knowledge of advance directives of family physicians in Ontario. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: A questionnaire was mailed to 1000 family physicians, representing a random sample of one-third of the active members of the Ontario College of Family Physicians; 643 (64%) responded. RESULTS: In all, 86% of the physicians favoured the use of advance directives, but only 19% had ever discussed them with more than 10 patients. Most of the physicians agreed with statements supporting the use of advance directives and disagreed with statements opposing their use. Of the respondents 80% reported that they had never used a directive in managing an incompetent patient. Of the physicians who responded that they had such experience, over half said that they had not always followed the directions contained in the directive. The proportions of physicians who responded that certain patient groups should be offered the opportunity to complete an advance directive were 96% for terminally ill patients, 95% for chronically ill patients, 85% for people with human immunodeficiency virus infection, 77% for people over 65 years of age, 43% for all adults, 40% for people admitted to hospital on an elective basis and 33% for people admitted on an emergency basis. The proportions of physicians who felt that the following strategies would encourage them to offer advance directives to their patients were 92% for public education, 90% for professional education, 89% for legislation protecting physicians against liability when following a directive, 80% for legislation supporting the use of directives, 79% for hospital policy supporting the use of directives, 73% for reimbursement for time spent discussing directives with patients and 64% for hospital policy requiring that all patients be routinely offered the opportunity to complete a directive at the time of admission. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians favour advance directives but use them infrequently. Most physicians support offering them to terminally or chronically ill patients but not to all patients at the time of admission to hospital. Although governments emphasize legislation, most physicians believe that public and professional education programs would be at least as likely as legislation to encourage them to offer advance directives to their patients. (+info)
Focus group findings about the influence of culture on communication preferences in end-of-life care.
(69/306)
BACKGROUND: Little guidance is available for health care providers who try to communicate with patients and their families in a culturally sensitive way about end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore the content and structure of end-of-life discussions that would optimize decision making by conducting focus groups with two diverse groups of patients that vary in ethnicity and socioeconomic status. DESIGN: Six focus groups were conducted; 3 included non-Hispanic white patients recruited from a University hospital (non-Hispanic white groups) and 3 included African-American patients recruited from a municipal hospital (African-American groups). A hypothetical scenario of a dying relative was used to explore preferences for the content and structure of communication. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six non-Hispanic white participants and 34 African-American participants. APPROACH: Content analysis of focus group transcripts. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic white participants were more exclusive when recommending family participants in end-of-life discussions while African-American participants preferred to include more family, friends and spiritual leaders. Requested content varied as non-Hispanic white participants desired more information about medical options and cost implications while African-American participants requested spiritually focused information. Underlying values also differed as non-Hispanic white participants expressed more concern with quality of life while African-American participants tended to value the protection of life at all costs. CONCLUSIONS: The groups differed broadly in their preferences for both the content and structure of end-of-life discussions and on the values that influence those preferences. Further research is necessary to help practitioners engage in culturally sensitive end-of-life discussions with patients and their families by considering varying preferences for the goals of end-of-life care communication. (+info)
Attitudes towards and barriers to writing advance directives amongst cancer patients, healthy controls, and medical staff.
(70/306)
OBJECTIVES: After years of public discussion too little is still known about willingness to accept the idea of writing an advance directive among various groups of people in EU countries. We investigated knowledge about and willingness to accept such a directive in cancer patients, healthy controls, physicians, and nursing staff in Germany. METHODS: Cancer patients, healthy controls, nursing staff, and physicians (n = 100 in each group) were surveyed by means of a structured questionnaire. RESULTS: Only 18% and 19% of the patients and healthy controls respectively, and 10% of the medical staff had written an advance directive. However, 50-81% of those surveyed indicated that they wished to write one. This intention was associated with deteriorating health (p < 0.001). Only 29% of the healthy controls and 43% of the patients knew about the possibility of appointing a health care proxy. A majority in all groups believed that advance directives may influence the course of treatment (79-85%), yet half of those surveyed in all groups fear that patients could be pressurised into writing an advance directive, and 38-65% thought that relatives could abuse such documents. CONCLUSIONS: Only a minority of the participants had written an advance directive and knew about the possibility of authorizing a health care proxy. Deteriorating health was associated with increasing willingness to make a directive. Despite a majority belief that advance directives may influence treatment at the end of life, other factors limit their employment, such as fear of abuse. (+info)
Ethical issues of resuscitation: an American perspective.
(71/306)
Challenging issues confront emergency physicians routinely when performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Ethical issues surrounding resuscitation may include issues of futility, withholding or withdrawing interventions, advance directives, family presence, practising procedures on the newly dead, palliative care, and communication. Principles of bioethics can be valuable in assessing and debating ethical dilemmas. In many cases where curative care is not possible or is not desired, the goal of medical care at the end of life is to provide comfort to the patient and family, rather than initiating technological interventions that are unlikely to benefit the patient. (+info)
A summary of important documents in the field of research ethics.
(72/306)
Today's researchers are obligated to conduct their studies ethically. However, it often seems a daunting task to become familiar with the important ethical codes required to do so. The purpose of this article is to examine the content of those ethical documents most relevant to the biomedical researcher. Documents examined include the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, Henry Beecher's landmark paper, the Belmont Report, the U.S. Common Rule, the Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, and the National Bioethics Advisory Commission's report on research protections for the mentally ill. (+info)