Aviad Rabinowich1, Iftach Sagy2,3, Liane Rabinowich4, Lior Zeller2,3, Alan Jotkowitz2,3. 1. Joyce and Irving Goldman Medical School, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, 1 Ben-Gurion Boulevard, Israel, P.O.B. 653, Beer-Sheva, Israel. aviadrabi@gmail.com. 2. Joyce and Irving Goldman Medical School, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, 1 Ben-Gurion Boulevard, Israel, P.O.B. 653, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 3. Soroka University Medical Center, Yitzhack I. Rager Blvd 151, 84101, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 4. Liver Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Tel-Aviv Medical Center, Weizmann St 6, Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine motives and attitudes towards life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) by clinical and preclinical medical students. METHODS: This was a scenario-based questionnaire that presented patients with a limited life expectancy. The survey was distributed among 455 medical students in preclinical and clinical years. Students were asked to rate their willingness to perform LSTs and rank the motives for doing so. The effect of medical education was then investigated after adjustment for age, gender, religion, religiosity, country of origin, and marital status. RESULTS: Preclinical students had a significantly higher willingness to perform LSTs in all cases. This was observed in all treatments offered in cases of a metastatic oncologic patient and an otherwise healthy man after a traumatic brain injury (TBI). In the case of an elderly woman on long-term care, preclinical students had higher willingness to supply vasopressors but not perform an intubation, feed with a nasogastric tube, or treat with a continuous positive air-pressure ventilator. Both preclinical and clinical students had high willingness to perform resuscitation on a twelve-year-old boy with a TBI. Differences in motivation factors were also seen. DISCUSSION: Preclinical students had a greater willingness to treat compared to clinical students in all cases and with most medical treatments offered. This is attributed mainly to changes along the medical curriculum. Changes in reasons for supplying LSTs were also documented.
PURPOSE: To determine motives and attitudes towards life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) by clinical and preclinical medical students. METHODS: This was a scenario-based questionnaire that presented patients with a limited life expectancy. The survey was distributed among 455 medical students in preclinical and clinical years. Students were asked to rate their willingness to perform LSTs and rank the motives for doing so. The effect of medical education was then investigated after adjustment for age, gender, religion, religiosity, country of origin, and marital status. RESULTS: Preclinical students had a significantly higher willingness to perform LSTs in all cases. This was observed in all treatments offered in cases of a metastatic oncologic patient and an otherwise healthy man after a traumatic brain injury (TBI). In the case of an elderly woman on long-term care, preclinical students had higher willingness to supply vasopressors but not perform an intubation, feed with a nasogastric tube, or treat with a continuous positive air-pressure ventilator. Both preclinical and clinical students had high willingness to perform resuscitation on a twelve-year-old boy with a TBI. Differences in motivation factors were also seen. DISCUSSION: Preclinical students had a greater willingness to treat compared to clinical students in all cases and with most medical treatments offered. This is attributed mainly to changes along the medical curriculum. Changes in reasons for supplying LSTs were also documented.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bioethics; End-of-life issues; Life-sustaining treatment; Medical education
Authors: Mohammadreza Hojat; Salvatore Mangione; Thomas J Nasca; Susan Rattner; James B Erdmann; Joseph S Gonnella; Mike Magee Journal: Med Educ Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 6.251
Authors: Daniel J Jakobson; Leonid A Eidelman; T M Worner; Arieh Eden Oppenheim; Reuven Pizov; Charles L Sprung Journal: Chest Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Sonia J S Crandall; Beth A Reboussin; Robert Michielutte; Jennie E Anthony; Michelle J Naughton Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2006-10-16 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: Charles L Sprung; Simon L Cohen; Peter Sjokvist; Mario Baras; Hans-Henrik Bulow; Seppo Hovilehto; Didier Ledoux; Anne Lippert; Paulo Maia; Dermot Phelan; Wolfgang Schobersberger; Elisabet Wennberg; Tom Woodcock Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-08-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Derek C Angus; Amber E Barnato; Walter T Linde-Zwirble; Lisa A Weissfeld; R Scott Watson; Tim Rickert; Gordon D Rubenfeld Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 7.598