Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Form in Greece; a pilot cross-sectional descriptive study

Dimitrios Chris Moustakas, Alexia Bani, Eleni Ntalaouti, Nikolaos Vechlidis, Charalampos Charalampidis, Stamatios Chalvatzis, Sotiria Grigoropoulou, Stylianos Faltsetas, Dimitrios T. Boumpas, Evrydiki Kravvariti, Theodoros Trokanas, Effy Vayena, Sotirios Tsiodras
{"title":"Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Form in Greece; a pilot cross-sectional descriptive study","authors":"Dimitrios Chris Moustakas, Alexia Bani, Eleni Ntalaouti, Nikolaos Vechlidis, Charalampos Charalampidis, Stamatios Chalvatzis, Sotiria Grigoropoulou, Stylianos Faltsetas, Dimitrios T. Boumpas, Evrydiki Kravvariti, Theodoros Trokanas, Effy Vayena, Sotirios Tsiodras","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.14.24311981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current legal framework in Greece does not permit withholding medical interventions to allow natural death, leading to a lack of documented advance directives to guide clinical practice. The aim of this pilot descriptive study is to culturally adapt the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form, and use it as a framework with which to assess the readiness of Greek residents for discussions on medical care near the end of life. Patients with severely limited prognosis and/or their family members were interviewed by attending physicians who then recorded their wish with regards to Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) status on the adapted POLST form, as well as their level of agreement with signing a similar form. Thirty-one patients with an age range of 18 to 109 years old participated. All had severe prognosis due to various end-stage diseases. Sixteen patients (51.6%) wished for DNR status and did not wish for further intervention in case they suffered cardio-respiratory arrest. Presence of an end-stage malignancy was associated with a higher chance of DNR preference (OR: 8.8, 95%CI 1.5-50, p = 0.017) or comfort measures only (OR: 5.6, 95%CI 1.1-30, p = 0.05). This pilot study of patients with severe prognosis hospitalized in a tertiary care center in Greece showed preliminary evidence of high acceptance of natural death and DNR status. POLST forms could be used as a framework for advance care planning through shared decision-making, thus reducing unwarranted treatments and enhancing trust between healthcare professionals and patients at the end of life.","PeriodicalId":501412,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Palliative Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.14.24311981","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current legal framework in Greece does not permit withholding medical interventions to allow natural death, leading to a lack of documented advance directives to guide clinical practice. The aim of this pilot descriptive study is to culturally adapt the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form, and use it as a framework with which to assess the readiness of Greek residents for discussions on medical care near the end of life. Patients with severely limited prognosis and/or their family members were interviewed by attending physicians who then recorded their wish with regards to Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) status on the adapted POLST form, as well as their level of agreement with signing a similar form. Thirty-one patients with an age range of 18 to 109 years old participated. All had severe prognosis due to various end-stage diseases. Sixteen patients (51.6%) wished for DNR status and did not wish for further intervention in case they suffered cardio-respiratory arrest. Presence of an end-stage malignancy was associated with a higher chance of DNR preference (OR: 8.8, 95%CI 1.5-50, p = 0.017) or comfort measures only (OR: 5.6, 95%CI 1.1-30, p = 0.05). This pilot study of patients with severe prognosis hospitalized in a tertiary care center in Greece showed preliminary evidence of high acceptance of natural death and DNR status. POLST forms could be used as a framework for advance care planning through shared decision-making, thus reducing unwarranted treatments and enhancing trust between healthcare professionals and patients at the end of life.
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
希腊医生维持生命治疗指令表的跨文化适应性;一项试点横断面描述性研究
希腊目前的法律框架不允许暂停医疗干预以允许自然死亡,这导致缺乏有据可查的预嘱来指导临床实践。本试验性描述性研究旨在从文化角度调整 "维持生命治疗医嘱(POLST)"表格,并以此为框架评估希腊居民是否准备好讨论临终前的医疗护理问题。预后严重受限的患者和/或其家属接受了主治医生的访谈,医生随后在改编后的 POLST 表上记录了他们对 "不进行人工呼吸"(DNR)状态的意愿,以及他们对签署类似表格的同意程度。有 31 名年龄介于 18 岁至 109 岁之间的患者参与了这项研究。所有患者都因各种终末期疾病而预后严重。16名患者(51.6%)希望获得 "DNR "状态,不希望在心肺功能骤停时接受进一步干预。存在终末期恶性肿瘤与更高的 DNR 意愿(OR:8.8,95%CI 1.5-50,p = 0.017)或仅采取舒适措施(OR:5.6,95%CI 1.1-30,p = 0.05)相关。这项针对在希腊一家三级医疗中心住院的预后严重的患者进行的试点研究初步表明,他们对自然死亡和 DNR 状态的接受度很高。POLST表格可作为通过共同决策进行预先护理规划的框架,从而减少不必要的治疗,并增强医护人员与生命末期患者之间的信任。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
An evaluation of the adequacy of Indian national and state Essential Medicines Lists (EMLs) for palliative care medical needs - a comparative analysis Development and evaluation of an online training program for palliative care in India Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Form in Greece; a pilot cross-sectional descriptive study Utilising the Palliative Prognostic Index in a mixed non-malignant and malignant patient group to determine prognosis. A general medicine tool for prognostication Pseudoscience in Cancer Services; a survey of National Health Service Trusts in England
×
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