Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
11
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1993-2-25
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
The term futile is used in many different ways. It is therefore difficult to decide whether a procedure or treatment such as CPR or hemodialysis or blood transfusion would be futile in a given case. The AMA's guidelines on the appropriate use of DNR orders state that DNR decisions should be made openly. Institutions should have policies and physicians should elicit the patient's preferences about CPR. For physicians, the question is no longer whether we should discuss DNR orders with our patients; instead, the issue is how to do so with compassion and caring. Physicians should share with patients their judgment about what medicine can and cannot do. Then physicians must "make decisions about when to withhold or limit resuscitation openly" in honest and trusting conversation between doctor and patient. Often CPR is an exercise in futility. The medical profession should be vested with the authority to make futility decisions if they are the product of open discussion and shared deliberation between physician and patient, family, or surrogate. Rationing, triage, and medical futility in relation to AIDS patients require careful deliberation and consideration. What was considered medically futile five years ago for an AIDS patient may be appropriate care nowadays. The need for appropriate use or non-use of life-sustaining therapy for the elderly, the terminally ill, patients with AIDS and other incurable illnesses is evident to patients, health care providers, policy makers, and the public. CPR should only be administered if it is expected to confer lasting benefit to the patient. However, if 10% of elderly patients benefit from CPR in the case of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, how can one consider this procedure futile? Although communication between physician and patient about difficult treatment limitation decisions has markedly improved in recent years, it remains a problem, largely because open dialogue with patients and families about futility is a demanding emotional and intellectual task. The medical profession is charged with setting standards for the proper implementation of judgments regarding futility.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
|
| pubmed:keyword | |
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
E
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
Nov
|
| pubmed:issn |
0028-7628
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
92
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
N
|
| pubmed:pagination |
485-8
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2005-8-10
|
| pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Ethics, Medical,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Ethics Committees,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Humans,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-New York,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Refusal to Treat,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Resuscitation Orders,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Societies, Medical,
pubmed-meshheading:1488204-Treatment Refusal
|
| pubmed:year |
1992
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Medical futility. Committee on Bioethical Issues of the Medical Society of the State of New York.
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Department of Medicine, Queens Hospital Center, Affiliation of the Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Jamaica, New York 11432.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|