预立医疗照护计划在我国实施的可行性探讨

从临床医护人员视角,阐述预立医疗照护计划、生前预嘱等在我国实施的可行性。具体分析预立医疗照护计划在我国的发展与需求以及在我国实施可能面临的问题与困境包括文化习俗、相关认知度、法律法规、医疗资源等,并就预立医疗照护计划在我国的发展提出几点思考和建议,包括构建预立医疗照护计划临床应用专家库及共识,强化医患有效的沟通、推动相关法律与政策的实施等。总之,我国将预立医疗照护计划、预先指示合法化及普遍推广还有很长一段路要走,需要在政府、学者、实践人员、公众的共同努力下才有可能实现。     

生前预嘱、预立医疗指示和预立医疗照护计划的概念关系辨析

通过回顾文献对生前预嘱、预立医疗指示、预立医疗照护计划三个概念产生的背景、定义、内容组成和法律实践等问题进行梳理与澄清,进一步指出概念之间的关系。生前预嘱与预立医疗指示属于归属关系。预立医疗照护计划是继预立医疗指示产生和应用后,为促进其签署而提出的概念,二者在内容、实施的侧重点及实施效果方面存在差异。通过概念辨析,旨在减少医务人员和公众对以上概念的混淆和误解,为后续研究和临床实践开展提供借鉴。     

生前预嘱二十年变迁：从临床试验谈起

通过检索Clinicaltrial及Clinicalkey网站2000年~2020年生前预嘱相关的临床试验项目,以其为切入点,探讨生前预嘱相关临床试验的数量、研究类型与方法、受试者类别、干预方式、研究内容等方面的变化趋势,比较分析阻碍生前预嘱在我国推广实施的文化、制度、宣传、人员等方面的因素。借鉴国外生前预嘱发展变革经验,并立足我国基本国情、伦理文化以及医疗环境等特点,从完善法律制度、加强资助、加大宣传力度、提升科研质量等方面提出建议,以期促进生前预嘱在我国的推广发展。     

基于意定监护制度对预先医疗指示的思考

鉴于中国大陆地区尚未建立预先医疗指示制度,为保证患者自主权,尊重其医疗意愿,可通过《民法总则》规定的意定监护制度实现预先医疗指示,其理由在于二者存在相同的法理基础、双向交叉的概念内涵以及现实实践基础。但依据现有法律规制实践过程中仍然存在不足,包括协议缔结的具体规定不明确、生效条件模糊、监督机制欠缺等问题。为解决这些问题,考虑完善相关法律规定,明确主体资格,制定合理的缔结程序,严格限制生效条件,建立监督机制等。     

肿瘤科医护人员对晚期肿瘤患者实施预先指示的质性研究

探讨肿瘤科医护人员对晚期肿瘤患者实施预先指示（advance directives,AD）的态度。使用目的抽样法对8位肿瘤科医护人员进行半结构式访谈。结果显示,肿瘤科医护人员对实施AD的态度可归纳为：（1）认可并有需求;（2）具体实施仍有一定困难;（3）可尝试应用但需一定对策。因此,肿瘤科医护人员总体非常支持AD的实施...     

肿瘤科医护人员对晚期肿瘤患者实施预先指示的质性研究

探讨肿瘤科医护人员对晚期肿瘤患者实施预先指示（advance directives,AD）的态度。使用目的抽样法对8位肿瘤科医护人员进行半结构式访谈。结果显示,肿瘤科医护人员对实施AD的态度可归纳为：（1）认可并有需求;（2）具体实施仍有一定困难;（3）可尝试应用但需一定对策。因此,肿瘤科医护人员总体非常支持AD的实施,但具体应用还需一定时期的本土化过程。     

尊重和扭曲——从自主权、医疗父权及其关系的角度谈和谐医患关系

当前的医患关系中存在着很多扭曲态度和错误看法.究其原因,一方面是因为患者的自主权无法得到顺利实现;另一方面在于能够保证诊疗活动顺利进行的医疗父权丧失了伦理依据.在深入分析自主权、医疗父权及其关系的基础上,对建构和谐的医患关系提出应跳出自主权和父权的泥淖,在互相尊重、有效沟通的基础上重建医患同盟.     

家属对脑卒中患者设立预先指示的态度研究

通过方便取样法,抽取海口市某三级老年病专科医院脑卒中患者家属249名,使用问卷调查法调查家属对脑卒中患者设立预先指示(advance directives,AD)的态度并分析其影响因素。结果显示,在生命终末期治疗的选择上,家属为自己选择的治疗与为患者选择的治疗一致性较差(Kappa=0.249,P<0.01)。家属的代理决策结果受多种因素影响。是否有过住院经历、家属代理决策的结果、家属对AD的态度是影响家属对患者设立AD态度的主要因素。     

知情同意中病人自主权和传统医疗父权的冲突

1　冲突的产生知情同意是目前临床医疗和科研工作中非常重要的医学伦理学原则 ,无论是国家法律法规还是行业规范都强调在医疗和科研行为之前要对病人进行知情同意 ,然后才可以开展其行为。我国 2 0 0 2年 9月 1日开始实施的《医疗事故处理条例》第十一条规定 :“在医疗活动中 ,医疗机构及其医务人员应当将患者的病情、医疗措施、医疗风险等如实告知患者 ,及时解答其咨询 ;但是 ,应当避免对患者产生不利后果。”《中华人民共和国执业医生法》第三章第 2 6条规定 :“医生应当如实向患者或者其家属介绍病情 ,医生进行实验性临床医疗 ,应当经医…     

预立医疗照护计划的国内外发展现状

随着医疗水平的不断提高,原本无法挽救的生命都可通过医疗技术给予维持,而与此同时,人们的自主意识在逐渐增强、生命价值观在不断完善,姑息照护也得到了持续发展.在这样的背景下,预立医疗照护计划慢慢引起人们重视,国外许多国家及我国台湾地区已给予了广泛认可.     

预立医疗照护计划的国内外发展现状

随着医疗水平的不断提高,原本无法挽救的生命都可通过医疗技术给予维持,而与此同时,人们的自主意识在逐渐增强、生命价值观在不断完善,姑息照护也得到了持续发展。在这样的背景下,预立医疗照护计划慢慢引起人们重视,国外许多国家及我国台湾地区已给予了广泛认可。     

Precedent Autonomy and Subsequent Consent

Honoring a living will typically involves treating an incompetent patient in accord with preferences she once had, but whose objects she can no longer understand. How do we respect her “precedent autonomy” by giving her what she used to want? There is a similar problem with “subsequent consent”: How can we justify interfering with someone's autonomy on the grounds that she will later consent to the interference, if she refuses now? Both problems arise on the assumption that, to respect someone's autonomy, any preferences we respect must be among that person's current preferences. I argue that this is not always true. Just as we can celebrate an event long after it happens, so can we respect someone's wishes long before or after she has that wish. In the contexts of precedent autonomy and subsequent consent, the wishes are often preferences about which of two other, conflicting preferences to satisfy. When someone has two conflicting preferences, and a third preference on how to resolve that conflict, to respect his autonomy we must respect that third preference. People with declining competence may have a resolution preference earlier, favoring the earlier conflicting preference (precedent autonomy), whereas those with rising competence may have it later, favoring the later conflicting preference (subsequent consent). To respect autonomy in such cases we must respect not a current, but a former or later preference.     

Physicians' Silent Decisions: Because Patient Autonomy Does Not Always Come First

Physicians make some medical decisions without disclosure to their patients. Nondisclosure is possible because these are silent decisions to refrain from screening, diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Nondisclosure is ethically permissible when the usual presumption that the patient should be involved in decisions is defeated by considerations of clinical utility or patient emotional and physical well-being. Some silent decisions—not all—are ethically justified by this standard. Justified silent decisions are typically dependent on the physician's professional judgment, experience and knowledge, and are not likely to be changed by patient preferences. We condemn the inappropriate exclusion of the patient from the decision-making process. However, if a test or treatment is unlikely to yield a net benefit, disclosure and discussion are at times unnecessary. Appropriate silent decisions are ethically justified by such considerations as patient benefit or economy of time.     

论医学伦理学的自主性原则

医学伦理学的自主性原则是对个人的自主和自由的尊重,其核心是对人权的尊重,包含有知情同意、保密、隐私等具体规则。自主性原则是根源于西方强调个性自由和选择的自由主义道德传统,我国古代哲人也提出过相近乃至相同的看法。     

The Professional Autonomy of the Medical Doctor in Italy

This contribution deals with the issue of the professional autonomy ofthe medical doctor. Worldwide, the physician's autonomy is guaranteedand limited, first of all, by Codes of Medical Ethics. InItaly, the latest version of the national Code of MedicalEthics (Code 1998) was published in 1998 by the Federation ofprovincial Medical Associations (FnomCeO). The Code 1998acknowledges the physician's autonomy regarding the scheduling, thechoice and application of diagnostic and therapeutic means, within theprinciples of professional responsibility. This responsibility has tomake reference to the following fundamental ethical principles:(1) the protection of human life; (2) the protection of thephysical and psychological health of the human being; (3) therelief from pain; (4) the respect for the freedom and the dignityof the human person, without discrimination; (5) an up-to-datescientific qualification (Art. 5). The authors underline that autonomyis an anthropological – and consequently ethical –characteristic of the human person. Different positions on autonomy inbioethics (individualistic, evolutionistic, utilitarian andpersonalistic models) are explained. The relation between theprofessional autonomy of the physician and the autonomy of the patientand of colleagues is discussed. In fact, the medical doctor isobliged: (1) to respect the fundamental rights of the person,first of all his/her life; (2) to ensure the continuity of thecare, even if he can only relieve the patient's suffering; (3) tomaintain, except under certain circumstances, professional secrecy andconfidentiality regarding patients and their medical records. Moreover,the physician cannot deny the patient correct and appropriateinformation. He/she should not perform any diagnostic or therapeuticactivity without the informed consent of the patient and the medicaldoctor must give up medical treatment in case of documented refusal ofthe individual. Furthermore, the medical doctor has the right to raiseconscientious objections if he/she is requested to perform medicalactions that are contrary to his/her conscience or medical opinion,unless this attitude would seriously and immediately harm the patient.Regarding the relationships with colleagues, the physician is obliged tosolidarity, mutual respect, and care of sick colleagues. Finally, theauthors discuss the Italian legislation affecting the physician'sprofessional autonomy: (1) the SSN health care Acts; (2) theso-called Charter for Public Health Care Services; (3) the Acts onprivacy; (4) Good Clinical Practice.