ANCP和SBGG关于姑息治疗共同决策的立场声明

Edison Iglesias de Oliveira Vidal, M. Kovács, J. Silva, L. Silva, Daniele Pompei Sacardo, A. Bersani, Ana Beatriz Galhardi Di Tommaso, Laiane de Moraes Dias, Antônio Carlos Moura de Albuquerque Melo, S. Iglesias, F. G. Lopes
{"title":"ANCP和SBGG关于姑息治疗共同决策的立场声明","authors":"Edison Iglesias de Oliveira Vidal, M. Kovács, J. Silva, L. Silva, Daniele Pompei Sacardo, A. Bersani, Ana Beatriz Galhardi Di Tommaso, Laiane de Moraes Dias, Antônio Carlos Moura de Albuquerque Melo, S. Iglesias, F. G. Lopes","doi":"10.1590/0102-311xen130022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Health care for patients with serious illnesses usually implies the need to make a large number of decisions, ranging from how information is shared to which diagnostic or therapeutic procedures will be adopted. The method of such decision-making has important implications from an individual and collective point of view and may contribute to either relieving or aggravating suffering. In this consensus document, the Bioethics Committee of the Brazilian National Academy of Palliative Care (ANCP) and the Permanent Committee on Palliative Care of the Brazilian Geriatrics and Gerontology Society (SBGG) adopt the principles of compassionate listening proposed by Saunders, of the nature of suffering proposed by Cassel, of dignity-preserving care proposed by Chochinov, and of cultural humility as a starting point for the construction of an official position of ANCP and SBGG on shared decision-making in palliative care. The position statement posits that, unlike paternalistic and consumerist models, the decision-making process in the sphere of palliative care must follow the mutualistic model of shared decision, where decisions are built based on dialogue between healthcare professionals and patients/family. The document sets forth the assumptions of this process, the limits of autonomy of patients/family and healthcare professionals and the distinction between futile and potentially inappropriate treatments, besides ratifying its incompatibility with any forms of coercion and conflict of interest foreign to the best interests of patients.","PeriodicalId":122102,"journal":{"name":"Cadernos de Saúde Pública","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Position statement of ANCP and SBGG on shared decision-making in palliative care\",\"authors\":\"Edison Iglesias de Oliveira Vidal, M. Kovács, J. Silva, L. Silva, Daniele Pompei Sacardo, A. Bersani, Ana Beatriz Galhardi Di Tommaso, Laiane de Moraes Dias, Antônio Carlos Moura de Albuquerque Melo, S. Iglesias, F. G. Lopes\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/0102-311xen130022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Health care for patients with serious illnesses usually implies the need to make a large number of decisions, ranging from how information is shared to which diagnostic or therapeutic procedures will be adopted. The method of such decision-making has important implications from an individual and collective point of view and may contribute to either relieving or aggravating suffering. In this consensus document, the Bioethics Committee of the Brazilian National Academy of Palliative Care (ANCP) and the Permanent Committee on Palliative Care of the Brazilian Geriatrics and Gerontology Society (SBGG) adopt the principles of compassionate listening proposed by Saunders, of the nature of suffering proposed by Cassel, of dignity-preserving care proposed by Chochinov, and of cultural humility as a starting point for the construction of an official position of ANCP and SBGG on shared decision-making in palliative care. The position statement posits that, unlike paternalistic and consumerist models, the decision-making process in the sphere of palliative care must follow the mutualistic model of shared decision, where decisions are built based on dialogue between healthcare professionals and patients/family. The document sets forth the assumptions of this process, the limits of autonomy of patients/family and healthcare professionals and the distinction between futile and potentially inappropriate treatments, besides ratifying its incompatibility with any forms of coercion and conflict of interest foreign to the best interests of patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":122102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cadernos de Saúde Pública\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cadernos de Saúde Pública\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311xen130022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cadernos de Saúde Pública","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311xen130022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

严重疾病患者的医疗保健通常意味着需要做出大量决定,从如何共享信息到将采用何种诊断或治疗程序。从个人和集体的角度来看,这种决策方法具有重要的影响,可能有助于减轻或加重痛苦。在这份共识文件中,巴西国家姑息治疗学会(ANCP)生物伦理委员会和巴西老年医学会(SBGG)姑息治疗常设委员会采用了Saunders提出的富有同情心的倾听原则,Cassel提出的痛苦本质原则,Chochinov提出的尊严保护原则,以及文化谦逊作为构建ANCP和SBGG在姑息治疗共同决策方面的官方立场的起点。立场声明认为,与家长式和消费主义模式不同,姑息治疗领域的决策过程必须遵循共同决策的互惠模式,在这种模式下,决策建立在医疗保健专业人员与患者/家属之间的对话基础上。该文件阐述了这一过程的假设,病人/家属和保健专业人员自主权的限制,以及无效治疗和可能不适当治疗之间的区别,此外还承认它与任何形式的胁迫和利益冲突都是不相容的,不利于病人的最佳利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Position statement of ANCP and SBGG on shared decision-making in palliative care
Health care for patients with serious illnesses usually implies the need to make a large number of decisions, ranging from how information is shared to which diagnostic or therapeutic procedures will be adopted. The method of such decision-making has important implications from an individual and collective point of view and may contribute to either relieving or aggravating suffering. In this consensus document, the Bioethics Committee of the Brazilian National Academy of Palliative Care (ANCP) and the Permanent Committee on Palliative Care of the Brazilian Geriatrics and Gerontology Society (SBGG) adopt the principles of compassionate listening proposed by Saunders, of the nature of suffering proposed by Cassel, of dignity-preserving care proposed by Chochinov, and of cultural humility as a starting point for the construction of an official position of ANCP and SBGG on shared decision-making in palliative care. The position statement posits that, unlike paternalistic and consumerist models, the decision-making process in the sphere of palliative care must follow the mutualistic model of shared decision, where decisions are built based on dialogue between healthcare professionals and patients/family. The document sets forth the assumptions of this process, the limits of autonomy of patients/family and healthcare professionals and the distinction between futile and potentially inappropriate treatments, besides ratifying its incompatibility with any forms of coercion and conflict of interest foreign to the best interests of patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Physical activity, anxiety, depression, and coping in Turkish men and women during the first wave of COVID-19 Presidential election results in 2018-2022 and its association with excess mortality during the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic in Brazilian municipalities Food insecurity in Brazil by household arrangements and characteristics between 2004 and 2022 Association between job lost and mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic and the role of food insecurity as mediator of this relationship O papel mediador da dependência de mídia social e da qualidade do sono na associação entre tempo de uso de mídia social e sintomas depressivos em universitários
×
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