Family decision making for end-of-life treatment: the SUPPORT nurse narratives. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to L Forrow.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
To determine how physicians might participate in the prevention of nuclear war in the post-Cold War era, we review, from a medical perspective, the history of the nuclear weapons era since Hiroshima and the status of today's nuclear arsenals and dangers. In the 1950s, physicians were active partners in governmental civil defense planning. Since 1962, physicians have stressed prevention of nuclear war as the only effective medical intervention. Public advocacy by physicians helped end both atmospheric nuclear testing in the 1960s and superpower plans for fighting a nuclear war in the 1980s. Today's dangers include nuclear arms proliferation, an increasing risk of nuclear terrorism, and the 35000 warheads that remain in superpower-nuclear arsenals, many still on hair-trigger alert. Physicians have recently joined with military and political leaders and over 1000 citizens' organizations in calling for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. Global medical collaboration in support of a verifiable and enforceable Nuclear Weapons Convention would be a major contribution to safeguarding health in the 21st century.
BACKGROUND: In the 1980s, many medical organizations identified the prevention of nuclear war as one of the medical profession's most important goals. An assessment of the current danger is warranted given the radically changed context of the post-Cold War era. METHODS: We reviewed the recent literature on the status of nuclear arsenals and the risk of nuclear war. We then estimated the likely medical effects of a scenario identified by leading experts as posing a serious danger: an accidental launch of nuclear weapons. We assessed possible measures to reduce the risk of such an event. RESULTS: U.S. and Russian nuclear-weapons systems remain on a high-level alert status. This fact, combined with the aging of Russian technical systems, has recently increased the risk of an accidental nuclear attack. As a conservative estimate, an accidental intermediate-sized launch of weapons from a single Russian submarine would result in the deaths of 6,838,000 persons from firestorms in eight U.S. cities. Millions of other people would probably be exposed to potentially lethal radiation from fallout. An agreement to remove all nuclear missiles from high-level alert status and eliminate the capability of a rapid launch would put an end to this threat. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of an accidental nuclear attack has increased in recent years, threatening a public health disaster of unprecedented scale. Physicians and medical organizations should work actively to help build support for the policy changes that would prevent such a disaster.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The inclusion of formal courses in medical ethics as part of standard undergraduate medical education has not led to widespread confidence in the moral and professional development of young physicians. As important as classes on informed consent and other such topics are, alternative approaches to professional moral development are needed. One example can be found in The U.S. Schweitzer Fellows Programs, which now support over 100 health professions students annually in six locations. Fellows participate in activities designed to strengthen the ideals that originally attracted them to medicine and other health care fields. Because Dr. Schweitzer is remembered primarily for the way he translated his ideals of human service into action, the core activity of each program is a direct-service project that addresses an important unmet health need of the local community or individuals in the community, with the support of community-based and school-based mentors. Alumni of these programs report that their experiences as Schweitzer fellows have helped them integrate their own ideals into their professional and career development. Such systematic efforts to recognize and support the latent idealism of young health professionals may strengthen the moral dimensions of professional life in ways that have broad social benefits.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the overall impact of a voluntary cholesterol screening program and to assess the importance of controlling for regression to the mean when evaluating the impact on higher-risk subgroups. DESIGN: Longitudinal study comparing baseline survey and cholesterol results with those obtained 17 months later, with adjustment for regression to the mean. SETTING: Participants were seen at three sites: an academic teaching hospital, an intermediate-care hospital, and a suburban community center. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand fifty-three participants were enrolled in a voluntary cholesterol screening program. MEASUREMENTS/MAIN RESULTS: Of 1053 study enrollees, 785 (75%) completed a follow-up questionnaire and 656 (62%) returned for follow-up cholesterol tests. Among all participants at high risk, measured cholesterol levels were 0.66 mmol/L (25.5 mg/dL) lower at follow-up, but 58% of this apparent change (0.38 mmol/L [14.7 mg/dL]) was attributable to the statistical phenomenon of regression to the mean. Among all participants at increased (both high and moderate) risk, after controlling for regression to the mean, reductions in cholesterol levels were significant for those younger than 60 years (-0.28 mmol/L [-10.8 mg/dL]; 95% confidence interval, -0.43 to -0.13; n = 390) but not for those 60 years or older (+0.007 mmol/L [+0.3 mg/dL]; 95% confidence interval, -0.16 to +0.17; n = 266). CONCLUSIONS: For subjects found at high risk in a cholesterol screening program, more than half of the apparent beneficial change in cholesterol level is attributable to regression to the mean. For participants older than 60 years, no clear benefit of cholesterol screening was documented.
This paper describes a new course designed to support the professional development of third-year medical students. The course runs through the clinical clerkships, and has several additional features: it includes a multidisciplinary faculty; it is centrally based in the medical school; it addresses students' values and attitudes in addition to their knowledge and skills; and it makes use of small-group learning methods, and faculty, student, and group continuity during the year. The curriculum, which addresses ethical, social, and communicative issues in medicine, plus the evaluation of students and of the course, are described.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
PURPOSE: To determine whether alternative methods of presenting a contrast between the same two quantities in descriptions of research results could lead to different treatment decisions by physicians. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We conducted a survey of practicing physicians and of faculty and fellows in training programs in clinical epidemiology and social science research methods. Each questionnaire presented results from a published study of either hypertension or hypercholesterolemia in two different ways: once as the relative change in the outcome rate and once as the absolute change in the outcome rate. We asked respondents to read each summary and indicate how the information contained in the summary would influence decisions about treatment. RESULTS: Of the 235 physicians who completed the questionnaire, 108 (46%) gave different responses to the same results presented in different ways. Of these, 97 (89.8%) indicated a stronger inclination to treat patients after reading of the relative change in the outcome rate (p less than 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The manner of presentation of results can influence physicians' judgments about the treatment of patients.
In 1989 the authors surveyed faculty who were teaching medical ethics in residencies in order to obtain information concerning the goals, formats, topics, and settings of such teaching, as well as the difficulties encountered. Of 163 teachers contacted, 94 (58%) responded and 63 (39%), representing 50 institutions, reported participation in formal ethics teaching programs for residents. The 63 teachers reported using a variety of formats, including ethics rounds, lectures, and incorporating ethics teaching into weekly case-management conferences. Frequently mentioned goals of ethics teaching included improving the residents' skills in reasoning about ethical decisions and improving the residents' understanding of the language and concepts of ethics. Thirty-four of the 63 teachers (54%) taught ethics in hospital settings exclusively and 21 (33%) taught both in hospitals and in outpatient clinics or offices. The teachers identified a number of barriers encountered in carrying out such teaching, most of which can be grouped in six categories: (1) time constraints due to residents' heavy schedules; (2) attitudes of residents that pose obstacles; (3) logistical problems associated with teaching in the clinical setting; (4) time demands placed on teachers; (5) lack of reinforcement for teaching ethics from other faculty; and (6) shortcomings in the background and training of faculty for teaching ethics in the clinical setting. The authors conclude that difficulties are commonly encountered and discuss ways to overcome the principal barriers to effective teaching of ethics in the residency years.
The HIV virus and the associated worldwide pandemic pose enormous biomedical, clinical, and social dilemmas for health care providers, biomedical researchers, policy analysts, and the public at large 10 years after its discovery. Many of these dilemmas and challenges are captured in the difficult ethical issues the HIV epidemic has highlighted for primary care physicians. Given the vanishingly small risk to primary care providers of acquiring HIV infection in office practice and the rapidly increasing prevalence of the virus, a clear ethical obligation to care for HIV-infected patients exists for primary care physicians. Primary care providers should be sensitive to the potentially sensitive nature of patient risk status and HIV testing results and balance confidentiality in the medical record with the "need to know" the patient's clinical status by other health care professionals. Every attempt should be made by the primary care provider to encourage HIV-infected patients to act responsibly toward their intimate sexual partners and inform them of their HIV status to take appropriate precautions against acquiring the virus. Primary care providers should also model responsible shared decision making and goal setting with HIV-infected patients early in the course of the disease, laying the foundation for subsequent decision making later in the course of the illness. Finally, considerable controversy exists about the responsibilities of HIV-infected providers to inform patients of their status; professional and public policy in this area is in rapid flux. Undoubtedly, the HIV epidemic will continue to challenge us and force careful examination of many of the critical dilemmas in modern biomedical ethics.
Formal training in clinical ethics must become a central part of residency curricula to prepare practitioners to manage the ethical dimensions of patient care. Residency educators must ground their teaching in an understanding of the conceptual, biomedical, and psychosocial aspects of the important ethical issues that arise in that field of practice. Four aspects of professional competence in clinical ethics provide a useful framework for curricular planning. The physician should learn to: (1) recognize ethical issues as they arise in clinical care and identify hidden values and unacknowledged conflicts; (2) think clearly and critically about these issues in ways that lead to ethically justifiable courses of action; (3) apply those practical skills needed to implement an ethically justifiably course of action; and (4) judge when the management of a clinical situation requires consultation with individuals or institutional bodies with additional expertise or authority. We argue that these practical goals can be accomplished with a relatively modest emphasis on the theoretical aspects of medical ethics.
Many patients think that there are shortcomings in the ethical dimensions of patient care, and research supports their view. In this issue of Annals, Erde suggests that physicians' incomes should depend on patients' assessments of their ethical behavior in much the same way that waiters' incomes depend on patrons' tips. Although Erde's solution is satiric, the problem is a serious one. The experiences and perspectives of patients regarding their own illness are undervalued by physicians. A truly patient-centered care demands that physicians elicit, understand, and respond to patients' perspectives. Tying physicians' pay to measurements of patient satisfaction is unlikely to dramatically improve the ethical quality of patient care as long as attention to the patient's perspective is seen as peripheral to "good medical care." Rather than relying on a single, easy "fix," we must re-examine all of professional development and practice. We need to choose persons for medical careers who will find patient-centered care rewarding; we need to provide such persons with training and socialization that underscores the value of personalized medicine; and we need to build institutions and systems that facilitate and reinforce patient-centered practice. The best ways to achieve these objectives are as yet unclear, but if we, as physicians, are offended by Erde's "modest proposal," then we must respond by proposing and implementing our own ideas about how patient care can become more humane.
To assess physicians' attitudes toward the use of deception in medicine, we sent a questionnaire to 407 practicing physicians. The questionnaire asked for responses to difficult ethical problems potentially resolvable by deception and asked general questions about attitudes and practices. Two hundred eleven (52%) of the physicians responded. The majority indicated a willingness to misrepresent a screening test as a diagnostic test to secure an insurance payment and to allow the wife of a patient with gonorrhea to be misled about her husband's diagnosis if that were believed necessary to ensure her treatment and preserve a marriage. One third indicated they would offer incomplete or misleading information to a patient's family if a mistake led to a patient's death. Very few physicians would deceive a mother to avoid revealing an adolescent daughter's pregnancy. When forced to make difficult ethical choices, most physicians indicated some willingness to engage in forms of deception. They appear to justify their decisions in terms of the consequences and to place a higher value on their patients' welfare and keeping patients' confidences than truth telling for its own sake.
Recent improvements in the clinical care of individual patients are rooted in advances in two distinct fields of modern medicine: biomedical research and clinical ethics. In this article, we review the differing roles of these two disciplines in guiding decision making for individual patients. Particular attention is placed on decisions involving risk factor intervention, using the common problem of mild hypertension as an illustration. Both the importance and the limitations for decision making of some recently published clinical trials are reviewed. Differences in interpretation of these trials are a source of major disputes about the proper threshold for medical intervention. The ethical aspects of treatment decisions are then reviewed, with particular emphasis on the doctrine of informed consent and on the role of patient participation in treatment decisions. Finally, new directions for clinical research are suggested that may yield a more complete scientific basis for treatment decisions and that may aid in fulfilling the ethical ideals that underlie the physician-patient relationship.
Few residency training programmes explicitly require substantive exposure to issues in medical ethics and fewer still have a formal curriculum in this area. Traditional undergraduate medical ethics courses teach preclinical students to identify ethical issues and analyse them at a theoretical level. Residency training, however, is the ideal time to establish the critical behavioural link which makes ethics truly useful in clinical medicine. The General Internal Medicine Residency Training Program at Rhode Island Hospital has developed an integrated, three-year curriculum with the goals of helping residents to perceive ethical issues in clinical practice, to utilise basic philosophical principles in resolving ethical dilemmas and to communicate these issues clearly and sensitively to patients. The curriculum has been well received by residents and has had a hospital-wide impact. We believe that training residents in medical ethics and communication skills is an effective approach to developing physicians' humane qualities.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.