Advance Care Planning in Palliative Care in Asia: Barriers and Implications.

Yoo Jeong Lee, Sun-Hyun Kim, Shin Hye Yoo, A-Sol Kim, Cheng-Pei Lin, Fhea, Sup, Sup, Diah Martina, Masanori Mori, Sang-Yeon Suh
{"title":"Advance Care Planning in Palliative Care in Asia: Barriers and Implications.","authors":"Yoo Jeong Lee, Sun-Hyun Kim, Shin Hye Yoo, A-Sol Kim, Cheng-Pei Lin, Fhea, Sup, Sup, Diah Martina, Masanori Mori, Sang-Yeon Suh","doi":"10.14475/jhpc.2024.27.4.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Advance care planning (ACP) in palliative care is essential for patient autonomy and quality of dying. This review explores ACP practices in South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, highlighting how legislation and cultural values shape those practices. In these three sectors, which are influenced by Confucian values, family involvement plays a significant role in decision-making. In South Korea, the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Act made ACP processes mandatory at all healthcare institutions and rapidly created advance directive registration agencies nationwide, with a national web-based system for legal documentation. The Act's narrow focus on terminal illness and dying phase may inadvertently delay end-of-life discussions. A broader social consensus is needed to allocate end-of-life care resources in a way that reflects patients' and families' wishes. Japan's family-based approach highlights relational autonomy, with ACP timing varying and no formal legal frameworks for advance directives. Expanded palliative care, ACP guidelines, systemic support, and public awareness drive progress in Japan. Taiwan's two relevant legislative frameworks-the Hospice Palliative Care Act and Patient Right to Autonomy Act-expand palliative care services for terminal illnesses and non-cancer diseases such as severe dementia, irreversible coma, and a persistent vegetative state. Misunderstandings of ACP and family-led decision-making may hinder ACP uptake. ACP referral based on patient care needs rather than terminal diagnoses is suggested. Overcoming common barriers in Asia necessitates open dialogues about death and public education. A standardized legal framework and comprehensive training for healthcare providers are equally important. Further international collaboration will suggest culturally sensitive ACP conversations across Asia.</p>","PeriodicalId":73780,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospice and palliative care","volume":"27 4","pages":"107-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11646817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospice and palliative care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14475/jhpc.2024.27.4.107","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

Advance care planning (ACP) in palliative care is essential for patient autonomy and quality of dying. This review explores ACP practices in South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, highlighting how legislation and cultural values shape those practices. In these three sectors, which are influenced by Confucian values, family involvement plays a significant role in decision-making. In South Korea, the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Act made ACP processes mandatory at all healthcare institutions and rapidly created advance directive registration agencies nationwide, with a national web-based system for legal documentation. The Act's narrow focus on terminal illness and dying phase may inadvertently delay end-of-life discussions. A broader social consensus is needed to allocate end-of-life care resources in a way that reflects patients' and families' wishes. Japan's family-based approach highlights relational autonomy, with ACP timing varying and no formal legal frameworks for advance directives. Expanded palliative care, ACP guidelines, systemic support, and public awareness drive progress in Japan. Taiwan's two relevant legislative frameworks-the Hospice Palliative Care Act and Patient Right to Autonomy Act-expand palliative care services for terminal illnesses and non-cancer diseases such as severe dementia, irreversible coma, and a persistent vegetative state. Misunderstandings of ACP and family-led decision-making may hinder ACP uptake. ACP referral based on patient care needs rather than terminal diagnoses is suggested. Overcoming common barriers in Asia necessitates open dialogues about death and public education. A standardized legal framework and comprehensive training for healthcare providers are equally important. Further international collaboration will suggest culturally sensitive ACP conversations across Asia.

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
亚洲姑息治疗的预先护理计划:障碍和影响。
姑息治疗中的预先护理计划(ACP)对患者的自主性和死亡质量至关重要。本综述探讨了韩国、日本和台湾的ACP实践,强调了立法和文化价值观如何影响这些实践。在这三个受儒家价值观影响的部门中,家庭参与在决策中起着重要作用。在韩国,《维持生命治疗决策法》(Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Act)规定所有医疗机构必须执行ACP流程,并迅速在全国范围内建立了预先指令注册机构,并建立了一个全国性的基于网络的法律文件系统。该法案对绝症和临终阶段的狭隘关注可能会无意中推迟对生命终结的讨论。需要更广泛的社会共识来分配临终关怀资源,以反映患者和家属的意愿。日本以家庭为基础的方法强调关系自治,ACP的时间变化不定,没有正式的预先指示法律框架。扩大姑息治疗、ACP指南、系统支持和公众意识推动了日本的进展。对ACP和家庭主导决策的误解可能会阻碍ACP的采用。ACP转诊基于病人的护理需要,而不是晚期诊断。要克服亚洲的共同障碍,就必须就死亡和公共教育问题进行公开对话。标准化的法律框架和对保健提供者的全面培训同样重要。进一步的国际合作将促使亚洲各国进行具有文化敏感性的ACP对话。
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
Case Presentation of Two Patients Compassionately Discharged, from Hospital to Home, Who Did Not Achieve Their Desired Home Death. End-of-life Care, Comfort Care, and Hospice: Terms and Concepts. Nurses' Experience of Good Nursing Care for Terminally Ill and End-of-life Patients: The Client-Nurse, Practice, and Environment Domains. Reorganization of Long-Term Care Insurance for End-of-Life Care. The Use of Baclofen to Control Vertical Nystagmus in a Patient with Advanced Glioma: A Case Report.
×
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