Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Advance Directive Adherence”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

Protecting autonomy as authenticity using Ulysses contracts.

Pre-commitment directives or Ulysses contracts are often defended as instruments that may strengthen the autonomous self-control of episodically disordered psychiatric patients. Autonomy is understood in this context in terms of sovereignty ("governing" or "managing" oneself). After critically analyzing this idea of autonomy in the context of various forms of self-commitment and pre-commitment, we argue that what is at stake in using Ulysses contracts in psychiatry is not autonomy as sovereignty, but autonomy as authenticity. Pre-commitment directives do not function to protect autonomous self-control. They serve in upholding the guidance that is provided by one's deepest identity conferring concerns. We elucidate this concept of autonomy as authenticity, by showing how Ulysses contracts protect the possibility of being "a self."

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed2004

Nursing facility compliance with do-not-hospitalize orders.

PURPOSE: This study sought to determine whether nursing homes comply with residents' do-not-hospitalize (DNH) orders prohibiting inpatient hospitalization. DESIGN AND METHODS: With the use of data from the nationally representative 1996 Nursing Home Component of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a multivariate logistic regression model was developed. RESULTS: Three percent of residents had DNH orders. These residents were half as likely to be hospitalized. Residents in not-for-profit or public facilities were less likely to be hospitalized than those in for-profit homes. Hospitalization was more likely among men, racial or ethnic minorities, those with more diagnosed health conditions, and those in facilities in the South compared with those in the Midwest. Hospitalized residents with DNH orders had no limitations of activities of daily living, were not located in hospital-based nursing homes, were less likely to be in a for-profit facility, and were sicker than nonhospitalized residents with DNH orders. IMPLICATIONS: Improved education regarding advance directives, particularly DNH orders, is necessary for health care practitioners and patients. More consistent and rigorous policies should be implemented in nursing facilities.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1999

Ethics, treatment and consent.

This article highlights notable developments in consent in psychiatry over the last year. In particular, it identifies increasingly sophisticated conceptualizations of consent and competence, and discusses advances in the process of decision-making and informed consent to non-treatment areas within psychiatry.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed1999

Advance directives, dementia, and 'the someone else problem'

Advance directives permit competent adult patients to provide guidance regarding their care in the event that they lose the capacity to make medical decisions. One concern about the use of advance directives is the possibility that, in certain cases in which a patient undergoes massive psychological change, the individual who exists after such change is literally a (numerically) distinct individual from the person who completed the directive. If this is true, there is good reason to question the authority of the directive -- which is supposed to apply to the individual who completed it, not to someone else. This is 'the someone else problem'. After briefly introducing advance directives as a basis for medical decision-making, this paper elaborates 'the someone else problem' in the context of severe dementia. The paper then reconstructs the reasoning that leads to this putative problem and exposes the important underlying assumption that we are essentially persons. An alternative view of what we are, one that regards personhood as inessential, is then considered, before several arguments are advanced in favor of that alternative view. The paper next explores implications for advance directives: 'The someone else problem' is effectively dissolved, while it is noted that a related problem (one beyond the paper's scope) may persist. A few implications beyond advance directives are also identified.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed2002

The concept of precedent autonomy.

Does respect for autonomy imply respect for precedent autonomy? The principle of respect for autonomy requires us to respect a competent patient's treatment preference, but not everyone agrees that it requires us to respect preferences formed earlier by a now-incapacitated patient, such as those expressed in an advance directive. The concept of precedent autonomy, which concerns just such preferences, is problematic because it is not clear that we can still attribute to a now-incapacitated patient a preference which that patient never disaffirmed but can no longer understand. If we cannot make that attribution, then perhaps we should not respect precedent autonomy--after all, how can you respect patient autonomy by giving patients what they no longer want, even if they never disaffirmed those wants? I argue that whether an earlier preference can still be attributed to a now-incapacitated patient depends on the reasons behind the preference, for a preference includes (and is not merely supported by) the reasons behind it. When the considerations that served as reasons no longer exist, neither does the preference which included those reasons. In particular, if the considerations that served as reasons for the patient exist only under conditions where the patient retains full mental capacity, then once that capacity is lost, so are those reasons and the preference based upon them. I use this analysis of precedent autonomy to ascertain the merits of various approaches to advance medical decisionmaking, including Nancy Rhoden's approach, approaches based on a Parfitian personal identity analysis, approaches based on soft paternalism, and approaches based on the stability and longevity of preferences. Despite the apparent absurdity of respecting patient autonomy by giving patients what they no longer prefer but have never disaffirmed, I conclude with some programmatic remarks on when and why respect for (precedent) autonomy nonetheless requires us to respect former preferences.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed2005

Attitudes toward advance directives and the impact of prognostic information on the preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation in medical inpatients in Chiang Mai University Hospital, Thailand.

Our previous study revealed that cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was performed in 65.7% of 411 terminally ill patients who died in a tertiary-care university hospital in northern Thailand. Advance directives (ADs) are needed to ensure that life-sustaining therapies are used more appropriately. To investigate inpatients' attitudes regarding ADs for CPR and the impact of providing prognostic information on treatment preferences for CPR, we interviewed a randomly selected group of 200 ambulatory medical inpatients in multiple sessions. The results showed that most subjects had a positive attitude towards ADs for CPR. The majority preferred to have CPR when no information was provided on the chance of survival. However, this proportion decreased depending on the prognostic scenarios. Our investigation suggested that the preference of patients for CPR should be assessed individually and gradually, with adequate information given on the chance of survival.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Whose will is it, anyway? A discussion of advance directives, personal identity, and consensus in medical ethics.

I consider objections to the use of living wills based upon the discontinuity of personal identity between the time of the execution of the directive and the time the person becomes incompetent. Recent authors, following Derek Parfit's "Complex View" of personal identity, have argued that there is often not sufficient identity of interests between the competent person who executes the living will and the incompetent patient to warrant the use of the advance directive. I argue that such critics err by seeking personal identity in a purely descriptive manner. By exploring Buchanan and Brock's concept of "surviving interests", an argument is developed that certain future-oriented acts have a normative force that contributes to the narrative unity which is constitutive of personal identity. This narrative concept of the self is entailed by many of our ordinary practices and challenges the philosophical consensus to view the self in a more dynamic and communitarian manner.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed1994

Rational desires and the limitation of life-sustaining treatment.

It is accepted that treatment of previously competent, now incompetent patients can be limited if that is what the patient would desire, if she were now competent. Expressed past preferences or an advance directive are often taken to constitute sufficient evidence of what a patient would now desire. I distinguish between desires and rational desires. I argue that for a desire to be an expression of a person's autonomy, it must be or satisfy that person's rational desires. A person rationally desires a course of action if that person desires it while being in possession of all available relevant facts, without committing relevant error of logic, and "vividly imagining" what its consequences would be like for her. I argue that some competent, expressed desires obstruct autonomy. I show that several psychological mechanisms operate to prevent a person rationally evaluating what future life in a disabled state would be like. Rational evaluation is difficult. However, treatment limitation, if it is to respect autonomy, must be in accord with a patient's rational desires, and not merely her expressed desires. I illustrate the implications of these arguments for the use of advance directives and for the treatment of competent patients.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed2004

Sharing death and dying: advance directives, autonomy and the family.

This paper critically examines the liberal model of decision making for the terminally ill and contrasts it with the familial model that can be found in some Asian cultures. The contrast between the two models shows that the liberal model is excessively patient-centered, and misconceives and marginalises the role of the family in the decision making process. The paper argues that the familial model is correct in conceiving the last journey of one's life as a sharing process rather than a process of exercising one's prior or counterfactual choice, and concludes by suggesting a policy framework for the practice of familialism that can answer the liberal challenge that familialism cannot safeguard the patient from abuse and neglect.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed1986

Ulysses contracts.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Advance Directive Adherence↗
PubMed1998

A prospective study of the efficacy of the physician order form for life-sustaining treatment.

OBJECTIVES: The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST), a comprehensive, one-page order form, was developed to convey preferences for life-sustaining treatments during transfer from one care site to another. This study examined the extent to which the POLST form ensured that nursing home residents' wishes were honored for Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and requests for transfer only if comfort measures fail. DESIGN: The study used chart record data to follow prospectively a sample of nursing home residents with the POLST. SETTING: Eight geographically diverse, long-term, adult-care facilities in Oregon in which the POLST was in use. PARTICIPANTS: Nursing home residents (n = 180), who had a POLST recording DNR designation and who indicated a desire for transfer only if comfort measures failed, were followed for 1 year. MEASUREMENTS: For all subjects: treatment and disposition after significant health status changes; orders for narcotics and for provision or limitation of aggressive interventions. For hospitalized subjects: diagnosis, medical interventions, and DNR orders. For those who died: cause and location of death, life-sustaining treatments attempted, and comfort measures provided. RESULTS: No study subject received CPR, ICU care, or ventilator support, and only 2% were hospitalized to extend life. Of the 38 subjects who died during the study year, 63% had an order for narcotics, and only two (5%) died in an acute care hospital. A total of 24 subjects (13%) were hospitalized during the year. Hospitalized subjects' mean length of stay was 4.9 days, and the mean rate of hospitalizations for all subjects was 174 per 1000 resident years. In 85% of all hospitalizations, patients were transferred because the nursing home could not control suffering. In 15% of hospitalizations (n = 4), the transfer was to extend life, overriding POLST orders. CONCLUSIONS: POLST orders regarding CPR in nursing home residents in this study were universally respected. Study subjects received remarkably high levels of comfort care and low rates of transfer for aggressive life-extending treatments.

Advance Care Planning↗
PubMed1997

Ethical issues of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: current practice among emergency physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To determine current practice and attitudes among emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the initiation and termination of CPR. METHODS: An anonymous survey was mailed to randomly selected EPs. Main outcome measures included respondents' answers to questions regarding outcome of resuscitation, and current practice regarding initiation, continuation, and termination of resuscitation for victims of cardiopulmonary arrest. RESULTS: The 1,252 respondents were from all 50 states, a variety of practice settings, and varying board certification. Most (78%) respondents honor legal advance directives regarding resuscitation. Few (7%) follow unofficial documents, or verbal reports of advance directives (6%). Many (62%) make decisions regarding resuscitation because of fear of litigation or criticism. A majority (55%) have recently attempted numerous resuscitations despite expectations that such efforts would be futile. Most respondents indicated that ideally, legal concerns should not influence physician practice regarding resuscitation (78%), but that in the current environment, legal concerns do influence practice (94%). CONCLUSIONS: Most EPs attempt to resuscitate patients in cardiopulmonary arrest, regardless of futility, except in cases where a legal advance directive is available. Many EPs' decisions regarding resuscitation are based on concerns of litigation and criticism, rather than their professional judgment of medical benefit or futility. Compliance with patients' wishes regarding resuscitation is low unless a legal advance directive is present. Possible solutions to these problems may include standardized guidelines for the initiation and termination of CPR, tort reform, and additional public education regarding resuscitation and advance directives.

Advance Directive Adherence↗