Literature DB >> 19332575

Autonomy, religion and clinical decisions: findings from a national physician survey.

R E Lawrence1, F A Curlin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient autonomy has been promoted as the most important principle to guide difficult clinical decisions. To examine whether practising physicians indeed value patient autonomy above other considerations, physicians were asked to weight patient autonomy against three other criteria that often influence doctors' decisions. Associations between physicians' religious characteristics and their weighting of the criteria were also examined.
METHODS: Mailed survey in 2007 of a stratified random sample of 1000 US primary care physicians, selected from the American Medical Association masterfile. Physicians were asked how much weight should be given to the following: (1) the patient's expressed wishes and values, (2) the physician's own judgment about what is in the patient's best interest, (3) standards and recommendations from professional medical bodies and (4) moral guidelines from religious traditions.
RESULTS: Response rate 51% (446/879). Half of physicians (55%) gave the patient's expressed wishes and values "the highest possible weight". In comparative analysis, 40% gave patient wishes more weight than the other three factors, and 13% ranked patient wishes behind some other factor. Religious doctors tended to give less weight to the patient's expressed wishes. For example, 47% of doctors with high intrinsic religious motivation gave patient wishes the "highest possible weight", versus 67% of those with low (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.3 to 0.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Doctors believe patient wishes and values are important, but other considerations are often equally or more important. This suggests that patient autonomy does not guide physicians' decisions as much as is often recommended in the ethics literature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19332575      PMCID: PMC2867468          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.027565

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  12 in total

1.  Commentary: value neutrality, moral integrity, and the physician.

Authors:  E D Pellegrino
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.718

2.  The role of risk communication in shared decision making.

Authors:  William Godolphin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

3.  ACOG Committee Opinion No. 385 November 2007: the limits of conscientious refusal in reproductive medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Views of older adults on patient participation in medication-related decision making.

Authors:  Vernee N Belcher; Terri R Fried; Joseph V Agostini; Mary E Tinetti
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  What do patients value in their hospital care? An empirical perspective on autonomy centred bioethics.

Authors:  S Joffe; M Manocchia; J C Weeks; P D Cleary
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  The role of doctor's opinion in shared decision making: what does shared decision making really mean when considering invasive medical procedures?

Authors:  Dennis J Mazur; David H Hickam; Marcus D Mazur; Matthew D Mazur
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Personal religious orientation and prejudice.

Authors:  G W Allport; J M Ross
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1967-04

8.  Religion, conscience, and controversial clinical practices.

Authors:  Farr A Curlin; Ryan E Lawrence; Marshall H Chin; John D Lantos
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  A typology of shared decision making, informed consent, and simple consent.

Authors:  Simon N Whitney; Amy L McGuire; Laurence B McCullough
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-01-06       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Birth outcomes for Arabic-named women in California before and after September 11.

Authors:  Diane S Lauderdale
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2006-02
View more
  23 in total

1.  Assessing physicians' roles on health care ethics committees.

Authors:  Charlotte McDaniel
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2010-12

2.  Pelvic examinations and access to oral hormonal contraception.

Authors:  Jillian T Henderson; George F Sawaya; Maya Blum; Laura Stratton; Cynthia C Harper
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Incorporating Spirituality into Health Sciences Education.

Authors:  Toby L Schonfeld; Kendra K Schmid; Deborah Boucher-Payne
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2016-02

4.  Directive counsel and morally controversial medical decision-making: findings from two national surveys of primary care physicians.

Authors:  Michael S Putman; John D Yoon; Kenneth A Rasinski; Farr A Curlin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Clinical and ethical judgment: a profound dilemma.

Authors:  Barbara Daly; Sankalp Gokhale; Ciro Ramos-Estebanez
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 9.910

6.  Does a Therapist's World View Matter?

Authors:  John R Peteet; Vithya B Rodriguez; Marta D Herschkopf; Alyssa McCarthy; Jennifer Betts; Stephanie Romo; J Michael Murphy
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2016-06

7.  Religion and Spirituality as a Cultural Asset in Medical Students.

Authors:  Callie Ray; Tasha R Wyatt
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2018-06

8.  Moral controversy, directive counsel, and the doctor's role: findings from a national survey of obstetrician-gynecologists.

Authors:  John D Yoon; Kenneth A Rasinski; Farr A Curlin
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 9.  The collaborative autonomy model of medical decision-making.

Authors:  Michael A Rubin
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.210

10.  Religion and anxiety treatments in primary care patients.

Authors:  Ryan E Lawrence; Kenneth A Rasinski; John D Yoon; Farr A Curlin
Journal:  Anxiety Stress Coping       Date:  2013-01-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.