Are medical ethicists out of touch? Practitioner attitudes in the US and UK towards decisions at the end of life
Are medical ethicists out of touch? Practitioner attitudes in the US and UK towards decisions at the end of life
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/jme.26.4.254
复制
发表时间：
2000-08-01
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Dickenson, DL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dickenson, DL
目的-评估英国和美国的医疗保健专业人员是否同意医学伦理学家关于医疗无效、撤回/拒绝治疗、普通/特殊干预和双重效应原则的观点。主题和设置-一个138项的态度问卷，由469名英国护士完成，学习开放大学课程“死亡和临终”与一个类似的调查问卷进行了比较，以759名美国护士和687名美国医生参加黑斯廷斯中心的课程“决定接近生命的尽头”。结果-从业者接受的概念广泛传播的生物伦理学家的相关性：双重效应、医疗无效以及英雄/普通干预与暂停/撤销治疗之间的区别。在英国护士组的“理性主义”轴的受访者谁形容自己为“没有宗教”更接近的生物伦理学的共识，扣留和撤回treatment.Conclusions -专业人士的信念有很大的不同，从他们的专业机构的建议，并从大多数意见，在生物伦理学。生物伦理学家应该谨慎地假设他们的观点会被从业者轻易接受。
Objectives - To assess whether UK and US health care professionals share the views of medical ethicists about medical futility, withdrawing/withholding treatment, ordinary/extraordinary interventions, and the doctrine of double effectDesign, subjects and setting - A 138-item attitudinal questionnaire completed by 469 UK nurses studying the Open University course on "Death and Dying" was compared with a similar questionnaire administered to 759 US nurses and 687 US doctors taking the Hastings Center course on "Decisions near the End of life".Results - Practitioners accept the relevance of concepts widely disparaged by bioethicists: double effect, medical futility, and the distinctions between heroic/ordinary interventions and withholding/withdrawing treatment. Within the UK nurses' group a "rationalist" axis of respondents who describe themselves as having "no religion" are closer to the bioethics consensus on withholding and withdrawing treatment.Conclusions - Professionals' beliefs differ substantially from the recommendations of their professional bodies and from majority opinion in bioethics. Bioethicists should be cautious about assuming that their opinions will be readily accepted by practitioners.