Literature DB >> 20158556

Physicians' views on the importance of patient preferences in surrogate decision-making.

Alexia M Torke1, Rachael Moloney, Mark Siegler, Anna Abalos, G Caleb Alexander.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To explore the degree to which physicians report reliance on patient preferences when making medical decisions for hospitalized patients lacking decisional capacity.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
SETTING: One academic and two community hospitals in a single metropolitan area. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eighty-one physicians who recently cared for hospitalized adults. MEASUREMENTS: A self-administered survey addressing physicians' beliefs about ethical principles guiding surrogate decision-making and physicians' recent decision-making experiences.
RESULTS: Overall, 72.6% of physicians identified a standard related to patient preferences as the most important ethical standard for surrogate decision-making (61.2% identified advanced directives and 11.4% substituted judgment). Of the 73.3% of physicians who reported recently making a surrogate decision, 81.8% reported that patient preferences were highly important in decision-making, although only 29.4% reported that patient preference was the most important factor in the decision. Physicians were significantly more likely to base decisions on patient preferences when the patient was in the intensive care unit (odds ratio (OR)=2.92, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.15-7.45) and less likely when the patient was older (OR=0.76 for each decade of age, 95% CI=0.58-0.99). The presence of a living will, prior discussions with the patient, and the physicians' beliefs about ethical guidelines did not significantly predict the physicians' reliance on patient preferences.
CONCLUSION: Although a majority of physicians identified patient preferences as the most important general ethical guideline for surrogate decision-making, they relied on a variety of factors when making treatment decisions for a patient lacking decisional capacity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20158556      PMCID: PMC3513265          DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02720.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc        ISSN: 0002-8614            Impact factor:   5.562


  22 in total

1.  Conflict associated with decisions to limit life-sustaining treatment in intensive care units.

Authors:  C M Breen; A P Abernethy; K H Abbott; J A Tulsky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Enough. The failure of the living will.

Authors:  Angela Fagerlin; Carl E Schneider
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

3.  Substituted judgment: the limitations of autonomy in surrogate decision making.

Authors:  Alexia M Torke; G Caleb Alexander; John Lantos
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-07-10       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Rethinking the ethical framework for surrogate decision making: a qualitative study of physicians.

Authors:  Alexia M Torke; Mary Simmerling; Mark Siegler; Danit Kaya; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  J Clin Ethics       Date:  2008

5.  Patients who want their family and physician to make resuscitation decisions for them: observations from SUPPORT and HELP. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Hospitalized Elderly Longitudinal Project.

Authors:  C M Puchalski; Z Zhong; M M Jacobs; E Fox; J Lynn; J Harrold; A Galanos; R S Phillips; R Califf; J M Teno
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.562

6.  Beyond substituted judgment: How surrogates navigate end-of-life decision-making.

Authors:  Elizabeth K Vig; Janelle S Taylor; Helene Starks; Elizabeth K Hopley; Kelly Fryer-Edwards
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.562

7.  Accuracy of primary care and hospital-based physicians' predictions of elderly outpatients' treatment preferences with and without advance directives.

Authors:  K M Coppola; P H Ditto; J H Danks; W D Smucker
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2001-02-12

8.  Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Vanessa Raymont; William Bingley; Alec Buchanan; Anthony S David; Peter Hayward; Simon Wessely; Matthew Hotopf
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004 Oct 16-22       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Physicians' experience with surrogate decision making for hospitalized adults.

Authors:  Alexia M Torke; Mark Siegler; Anna Abalos; Rachael M Moloney; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Inconsistency over time in the preferences of older persons with advanced illness for life-sustaining treatment.

Authors:  Terri R Fried; John O'Leary; Peter Van Ness; Liana Fraenkel
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.562

View more
  9 in total

1.  How clinicians discuss critically ill patients' preferences and values with surrogates: an empirical analysis.

Authors:  Leslie P Scheunemann; Thomas V Cunningham; Robert M Arnold; Praewpannarai Buddadhumaruk; Douglas B White
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 7.598

2.  [Family's Perception of Proxy Decision Making to Authorize Do Not Resuscitate Order of Elderly Patients in Long Term Care Facility: A Q-Methodological Study].

Authors:  Hyeon Jin Cho; Jiyeon Kang
Journal:  J Korean Acad Nurs       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 0.984

3.  How Surrogates Decide: A Secondary Data Analysis of Decision-Making Principles Used by the Surrogates of Hospitalized Older Adults.

Authors:  Rohit Devnani; James E Slaven; Gabriel T Bosslet; Kianna Montz; Lev Inger; Emily S Burke; Alexia M Torke
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Critical care physicians' approaches to negotiating with surrogate decision makers: a qualitative study.

Authors:  David R Brush; Crystal E Brown; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 7.598

5.  What factors are associated with having an advance directive among older adults who are new to long term care services?

Authors:  Karen B Hirschman; Katherine M Abbott; Alexandra L Hanlon; Janet Prvu Bettger; Mary D Naylor
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2011-02-26       Impact factor: 4.669

6.  Redefining the "planning" in advance care planning: preparing for end-of-life decision making.

Authors:  Rebecca L Sudore; Terri R Fried
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Elders' preferences for life-prolonging treatment and their proxies' substituted judgment: influence of the elders' current health.

Authors:  Laraine Winter; Susan M Parks
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2012-08-06

Review 8.  Variables that influence the medical decision regarding Advance Directives and their impact on end-of-life care.

Authors:  Larissa Mont'Alverne de Arruda; Kelline Paiva Bringel Abreu; Laryssa Braga Cavalcante Santana; Manuela Vasconcelos de Castro Sales
Journal:  Einstein (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2019-10-10

9.  Advance Directives and Communication Skills of Prehospital Physicians Involved in the Care of Cardiovascular Patients.

Authors:  Fabienne Gigon; Paolo Merlani; Bara Ricou
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.817

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.