Portuguese Advance Directives-a twist against futility? A cross sectional study.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Sao Paulo Medical Journal Pub Date : 2024-03-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0537.R2.201023
Catarina Sampaio Martins, Rui Nunes
{"title":"Portuguese Advance Directives-a twist against futility? A cross sectional study.","authors":"Catarina Sampaio Martins, Rui Nunes","doi":"10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0537.R2.201023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advance Directive documents allow citizens to choose the treatments they want for end-of-life care without considering therapeutic futility.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze patients' and caregivers' answers to Advance Directives and understand their expectations regarding their decisions.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>This study analyzed participants' answers to a previously published trial, conceived to test the document's efficacy as a communication tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty palliative patients and 60 caregivers (n = 120) registered their preferences in the Advance Directive document and expressed their expectations regarding whether to receive the chosen treatments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the patient and caregiver groups, 30% and 23.3% wanted to receive cardiorespiratory resuscitation; 23.3% and 25% wanted to receive artificial organ support; and 40% and 35% chose to receive artificial feeding and hydration, respectively. The participants ignored the concept of therapeutic futility and expected to receive invasive treatments. The concept of therapeutic futility should be addressed and discussed with both the patients and caregivers. Legal Advanced Directive documents should be made clear to reduce misinterpretations and potential legal conflicts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors suggest that all citizens should be clarified regarding the futility concept before filling out the Advance Directives and propose a grammatical change in the document, replacing the phrase \"Health Care to Receive / Not to Receive\" with the sentence \"Health Care to Accept / Refuse\" so that patients cannot demand treatments, but instead accept or refuse the proposed therapeutic plans.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05090072.</p><p><strong>Url: </strong>https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05090072.</p>","PeriodicalId":49574,"journal":{"name":"Sao Paulo Medical Journal","volume":"142 3","pages":"e2022537"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10962926/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sao Paulo Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0537.R2.201023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Advance Directive documents allow citizens to choose the treatments they want for end-of-life care without considering therapeutic futility.

Objectives: To analyze patients' and caregivers' answers to Advance Directives and understand their expectations regarding their decisions.

Design and setting: This study analyzed participants' answers to a previously published trial, conceived to test the document's efficacy as a communication tool.

Methods: Sixty palliative patients and 60 caregivers (n = 120) registered their preferences in the Advance Directive document and expressed their expectations regarding whether to receive the chosen treatments.

Results: In the patient and caregiver groups, 30% and 23.3% wanted to receive cardiorespiratory resuscitation; 23.3% and 25% wanted to receive artificial organ support; and 40% and 35% chose to receive artificial feeding and hydration, respectively. The participants ignored the concept of therapeutic futility and expected to receive invasive treatments. The concept of therapeutic futility should be addressed and discussed with both the patients and caregivers. Legal Advanced Directive documents should be made clear to reduce misinterpretations and potential legal conflicts.

Conclusion: The authors suggest that all citizens should be clarified regarding the futility concept before filling out the Advance Directives and propose a grammatical change in the document, replacing the phrase "Health Care to Receive / Not to Receive" with the sentence "Health Care to Accept / Refuse" so that patients cannot demand treatments, but instead accept or refuse the proposed therapeutic plans.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05090072.

Url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05090072.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
葡萄牙的预先指示--反对徒劳的转折?一项横断面研究。
背景:预嘱文件允许公民在不考虑治疗无效的情况下选择他们希望的临终关怀治疗方法:分析患者和护理人员对预先医疗指示的回答,了解他们对自己决定的期望:本研究分析了参与者对之前发表的一项试验的回答,该试验旨在测试该文件作为沟通工具的有效性:60名姑息治疗患者和60名照护者(n = 120)在预先指示文件中登记了他们的偏好,并表达了他们对是否接受所选治疗的期望:在患者组和护理者组中,分别有 30% 和 23.3% 的人希望接受心肺复苏;分别有 23.3% 和 25% 的人希望接受人工器官支持;分别有 40% 和 35% 的人选择接受人工喂养和水合治疗。参与者忽视了治疗无效的概念,希望接受侵入性治疗。治疗无用论的概念应得到重视,并与患者和护理人员进行讨论。法律上的预先医疗指示文件应清晰明了,以减少误解和潜在的法律冲突:作者建议,所有公民在填写预先医疗指示前都应明确治疗无效的概念,并建议修改文件的语法,将 "接受/不接受医疗服务 "改为 "接受/拒绝医疗服务",这样患者就不能要求治疗,而是接受或拒绝建议的治疗方案:ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05090072.Url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05090072.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sao Paulo Medical Journal
Sao Paulo Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
210
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published bimonthly by the Associação Paulista de Medicina, the journal accepts articles in the fields of clinical health science (internal medicine, gynecology and obstetrics, mental health, surgery, pediatrics and public health). Articles will be accepted in the form of original articles (clinical trials, cohort, case-control, prevalence, incidence, accuracy and cost-effectiveness studies and systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis), narrative reviews of the literature, case reports, short communications and letters to the editor. Papers with a commercial objective will not be accepted.
期刊最新文献
Alcohol consumption habits and their impact on academic performance: analysis of ethanol patterns among health students. A cross-sectional study. Perceptions of childhood immunization in São Paulo: quantitative-qualitative cross-sectional study. Relationship between angiogenic growth factors and atherosclerosis in renal transplantation recipients: a cross-sectional study. Challenges and perspectives in preventing and treating obesity. Artificial intelligence in scientific writing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1