ABSTRACT
Background@#Clinical ethics support is a form of preventive ethics aimed at mediating ethicsrelated conflicts and managing ethical issues arising in the healthcare setting. However, limited evidence exists regarding the specific ethical issues in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore the diverse ethical issues of cases referred to clinical ethics support after the new legislation on hospice palliative care and end-of-life decision-making was implemented in Korea in 2018. @*Methods@#A retrospective study of cases referred to clinical ethics support at a university hospital in Korea from February 2018 to February 2021 was conducted. The ethical issues at the time of referral were analyzed via qualitative content analysis of the ethics consultationrelated documents. @*Results@#A total of 60 cases of 57 patients were included in the study, of whom 52.6% were men and 56.1% were older than 60 years of age. The majority of cases (80%) comprised patients from the intensive care unit. One-third of the patients were judged as being at the end-of-life stage. The most frequent ethical categories were identified as goals of care/ treatment (78.3%), decision-making (75%), relationship (41.7%), and end-of-life issues (31.7%). More specifically, best interests (71.7%), benefits and burdens/harms (61.7%), refusal (53.3%), and surrogate decision-making (33.3%), followed by withholding or withdrawal (28.3%) were the most frequent ethical issues reported, which became diversified by year. In addition, the ethical issues appeared to differ by age group and judgment of the end-of-life stage. @*Conclusion@#The findings of this study expand the current understanding of the diverse ethical issues including decision-making and goals of care/treatment that have been referred to clinical ethics support since the enforcement of the new legislation in Korea. This study suggests a need for further research on the longitudinal exploration of ethical issues and implementation of clinical ethics support in multiple healthcare centers.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This study aimed to investigate difficulties doctors experience during life-sustaining treatment (LST) discussion with seriously ill patients and their families after enactment of the LST Decisions Act in February 2018. @*Materials and Methods@#A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a tertiary hospital in the Republic of Korea in August 2019. Six hundred eighty-six doctors who care for seriously ill patients were given a structured questionnaire, and difficulties during the discussion were examined. @*Results@#One hundred thirty-two doctors completed the questionnaire. Eighty-five percent answered they treat cancer patients. Most (86.4%) experienced considerable difficulties during LST discussions (mean score, 7.4±1.6/10). The two most common difficulties were communication with patients and family and determining when to discuss LST. Two-thirds of doctors found direct discussions with the patient difficult and said they would initiate LST discussions only with family. LST discussions were actually initiated later than considered appropriate. When medically assessing whether the patient is imminently dying, 56% of doctors experienced disagreements with other doctors, which could affect their decisions. @*Conclusion@#This study found that most doctors experienced serious difficulties regarding communication with patients and family and medical assessment of dying process during LST discussions. To alleviate these difficulties, further institutional support is needed to improve the LST discussion between doctors, patients, and family.
ABSTRACT
In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing and strict visitation policies at hospitals have made it difficult for medical staff to provide high-quality endof-life (EOL) care to dying patients and their families. There are various issues related to EOL care, including psychological problems of patients and their families, difficulties in EOL decision-making, the complicated grief of the bereaved family, moral distress, and exhaustion of medical staff. In relation to these issues, we aimed to discuss practical considerations in providing high-quality EOL care in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, medical staff should discuss advance care planning as early as possible and use the parallel planning strategy. Second, medical staff should play a role in facilitating patient-family communication. Third, medical staff should actively and proactively evaluate and alleviate dying patients’ symptoms using non-verbal communication. Lastly, medical staff should provide care for family members of the dying patient, who may be particularly vulnerable to postbereavement problems in the COVID-19 era. Establishing a system of screening highrisk individuals for complicated grief and connecting them to bereavement support services might be considered. Despite the challenging and limited environment, providing EOL care is essential for patients to die with dignity in peace and for the remaining family to return to life after the loved one’s death. Efforts considering the practical issues faced by all medical staff and healthcare institutions caring for dying patients should be made.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This study aimed to investigate difficulties doctors experience during life-sustaining treatment (LST) discussion with seriously ill patients and their families after enactment of the LST Decisions Act in February 2018. @*Materials and Methods@#A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a tertiary hospital in the Republic of Korea in August 2019. Six hundred eighty-six doctors who care for seriously ill patients were given a structured questionnaire, and difficulties during the discussion were examined. @*Results@#One hundred thirty-two doctors completed the questionnaire. Eighty-five percent answered they treat cancer patients. Most (86.4%) experienced considerable difficulties during LST discussions (mean score, 7.4±1.6/10). The two most common difficulties were communication with patients and family and determining when to discuss LST. Two-thirds of doctors found direct discussions with the patient difficult and said they would initiate LST discussions only with family. LST discussions were actually initiated later than considered appropriate. When medically assessing whether the patient is imminently dying, 56% of doctors experienced disagreements with other doctors, which could affect their decisions. @*Conclusion@#This study found that most doctors experienced serious difficulties regarding communication with patients and family and medical assessment of dying process during LST discussions. To alleviate these difficulties, further institutional support is needed to improve the LST discussion between doctors, patients, and family.
ABSTRACT
In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing and strict visitation policies at hospitals have made it difficult for medical staff to provide high-quality endof-life (EOL) care to dying patients and their families. There are various issues related to EOL care, including psychological problems of patients and their families, difficulties in EOL decision-making, the complicated grief of the bereaved family, moral distress, and exhaustion of medical staff. In relation to these issues, we aimed to discuss practical considerations in providing high-quality EOL care in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, medical staff should discuss advance care planning as early as possible and use the parallel planning strategy. Second, medical staff should play a role in facilitating patient-family communication. Third, medical staff should actively and proactively evaluate and alleviate dying patients’ symptoms using non-verbal communication. Lastly, medical staff should provide care for family members of the dying patient, who may be particularly vulnerable to postbereavement problems in the COVID-19 era. Establishing a system of screening highrisk individuals for complicated grief and connecting them to bereavement support services might be considered. Despite the challenging and limited environment, providing EOL care is essential for patients to die with dignity in peace and for the remaining family to return to life after the loved one’s death. Efforts considering the practical issues faced by all medical staff and healthcare institutions caring for dying patients should be made.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#Life-sustaining treatment (LST) decisions for patients and caregivers at the end-of-life (EOL) process are supported by the “Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on LST for Patients at the EOL,” enforced in February 2018. Itremains unclearwhetherthe act changes EOL decisions and LST implementation in clinical practice. For this study, we investigated patients’ decision-making regarding LSTs during the EOL process since the act’s enforcement. @*Materials and Methods@#Retrospective reviews were conducted on adult patients who were able to decide to terminate LST and died at Seoul National University Hospital between February 5, 2018, and February 5, 2019. We examined demographics, who made the decisions, the type and date of documentation confirming patient's LST, and whether the LST was withheld or withdrawn. @*Results@#Of 809 patients who were enrolled, 29% (n=231) completed forms regarding LST themselves, and 71% (n=578) needed family members to decide. The median time from confirmation of the EOL process to death and from the Advance Statement to death were 2 and 5 days, respectively (both ranges, 0 to 244). In total, 90% (n=727) of patients withheld treatment, and 10% (n=82)withdrewit. We found a higherwithdrawalratewhen family members made the decisions (13.3% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001). @*Conclusion@#After the act’s enforcement, withdrawing LSTs became lawful and self-determination rates increased. Family members still make 71% of decisions regarding LSTs, but these are often inconsistent with the patients’ wishes; thus, further efforts are needed to integrate the new act into clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#In Korea, since the Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on LifeSustaining Treatment for Patients at the End of Life was implemented in February 2018, advance directives (ADs) have become legally effective and should be documented after sufficient explanation by a registered counselor. However, little is known regarding the adequacy of current AD counseling. This qualitative study aimed to explore the barriers to AD counseling based on counselors’ experiences. @*Methods@#We conducted focus group interviews using purposive sampling. Seven counselors working at hospitals, community health institutions, and non-profit organizations participated in this study. They were asked about the challenges and problems they encountered during AD counseling. @*Results@#Three themes emerged from this study; 1) issues regarding consistency in AD counseling, 2) issues regarding AD counselors’ competency and work environment, and 3) issues regarding the adequacy of the service system. The interviewees stated that the lack of a manual for standardized service made AD counseling inconsistent. The limited competency and poor work environment of counselors were pointed out as major barriers. The interviewees also stated that a proper service system considering individual circumstances is absent. @*Conclusion@#The goals of AD counseling should be clarified and guidance should be implemented for providing standardized services. Further efforts to enhance the competency of AD counselors and to improve their working conditions are needed. Establishing an integrated framework for an adequate service system is also essential to overcome systematic barriers to AD counseling.
ABSTRACT
Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) is a reversible vasospasm that is aggravated by cold or emotional stress. Before confirming RP, it is essential to consider other possible causes including compressive neuropathy, sensori-neuropathy, thyroid disease, hematologic conditions and offending drugs. RP is typically characterized by the three-step color change that turns pallor (white), cyanosis (blue), and then erythema (red) of reperfusion. Once RP is diagnosed, it is important to determine whether it is primary or secondary RP. To distinguish primary from the secondary RP, the specialized tests performing in clinical practice are antinuclear antibody (ANA) and nailfold capillary microscopy (NFC). The combination of ANA and NFC is most helpful for discriminating secondary RP due to autoimmune rheumatic disease. Thereby, normal findings of NFC in primary RP distinguished from secondary RP should be understood. Patients with primary RP usually improves with symptomatic treatment focused on lifestyle modification and patient education, but those with secondary RP should be treated together with associated disease or causes.
ABSTRACT
Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) is a reversible vasospasm that is aggravated by cold or emotional stress. Before confirming RP, it is essential to consider other possible causes including compressive neuropathy, sensori-neuropathy, thyroid disease, hematologic conditions and offending drugs. RP is typically characterized by the three-step color change that turns pallor (white), cyanosis (blue), and then erythema (red) of reperfusion. Once RP is diagnosed, it is important to determine whether it is primary or secondary RP. To distinguish primary from the secondary RP, the specialized tests performing in clinical practice are antinuclear antibody (ANA) and nailfold capillary microscopy (NFC). The combination of ANA and NFC is most helpful for discriminating secondary RP due to autoimmune rheumatic disease. Thereby, normal findings of NFC in primary RP distinguished from secondary RP should be understood. Patients with primary RP usually improves with symptomatic treatment focused on lifestyle modification and patient education, but those with secondary RP should be treated together with associated disease or causes.