Cargando…

Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study

OBJECTIVE: Advance care planning (ACP) assists people to identify their goals, values and treatment preferences for future care. Ideally, preferences are documented in an advance care directive (ACD) and used by doctors to guide medical decision-making should the patient subsequently lose their deci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moore, Nadia, Detering, Karen M, Low, Tessa, Nolte, Linda, Fraser, Scott, Sellars, Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6830700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31676659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032638
_version_ 1783465822983815168
author Moore, Nadia
Detering, Karen M
Low, Tessa
Nolte, Linda
Fraser, Scott
Sellars, Marcus
author_facet Moore, Nadia
Detering, Karen M
Low, Tessa
Nolte, Linda
Fraser, Scott
Sellars, Marcus
author_sort Moore, Nadia
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Advance care planning (ACP) assists people to identify their goals, values and treatment preferences for future care. Ideally, preferences are documented in an advance care directive (ACD) and used by doctors to guide medical decision-making should the patient subsequently lose their decision-making capacity. However, studies demonstrate that ACDs are not always adhered to by doctors in clinical practice. We aim to describe the attitudes and perspectives of doctors regarding ACD adherence and the utility of ACDs in clinical practice. DESIGN: Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted using three case-based vignettes to explore doctors’ decision-making and attitudes towards ACDs. Transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis. SETTING: Doctors from a variety of medical specialties and with varying experience levels were recruited from a large tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 doctors were interviewed, 48% female (10/21). Most (19/21) reported having experience using ACDs. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: aligning with patient preferences (avoiding unwanted care, prioritising autonomy and anticipating family opposition), advocating best interests (defining futile care, relying on clinical judgement, rejecting unreasonable decisions and disregarding legal consequences), establishing validity (doubting rigour of the decision-making process, questioning patients’ ability to understand treatment decisions, distrusting outdated preferences and seeking confirmation) and translating written preferences into practice (contextualising patient preferences, applying subjective terminology and prioritising emergency medical treatment). CONCLUSIONS: ACDs provide doctors with opportunities to align patient preferences with treatment and uphold patient autonomy. However, doctors experience decisional conflict when attempting to adhere to ACDs in practice, especially when they believe that adhering to the ACD is not in the patients’ best interests, or if they doubt the validity of the ACD. Future ACP programmes should consider approaches to improve the validity and applicability of ACDs. In addition, there is a need for ethical and legal education to support doctors’ knowledge and confidence in ACP and enacting ACDs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6830700
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68307002019-11-20 Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study Moore, Nadia Detering, Karen M Low, Tessa Nolte, Linda Fraser, Scott Sellars, Marcus BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVE: Advance care planning (ACP) assists people to identify their goals, values and treatment preferences for future care. Ideally, preferences are documented in an advance care directive (ACD) and used by doctors to guide medical decision-making should the patient subsequently lose their decision-making capacity. However, studies demonstrate that ACDs are not always adhered to by doctors in clinical practice. We aim to describe the attitudes and perspectives of doctors regarding ACD adherence and the utility of ACDs in clinical practice. DESIGN: Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted using three case-based vignettes to explore doctors’ decision-making and attitudes towards ACDs. Transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis. SETTING: Doctors from a variety of medical specialties and with varying experience levels were recruited from a large tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 doctors were interviewed, 48% female (10/21). Most (19/21) reported having experience using ACDs. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: aligning with patient preferences (avoiding unwanted care, prioritising autonomy and anticipating family opposition), advocating best interests (defining futile care, relying on clinical judgement, rejecting unreasonable decisions and disregarding legal consequences), establishing validity (doubting rigour of the decision-making process, questioning patients’ ability to understand treatment decisions, distrusting outdated preferences and seeking confirmation) and translating written preferences into practice (contextualising patient preferences, applying subjective terminology and prioritising emergency medical treatment). CONCLUSIONS: ACDs provide doctors with opportunities to align patient preferences with treatment and uphold patient autonomy. However, doctors experience decisional conflict when attempting to adhere to ACDs in practice, especially when they believe that adhering to the ACD is not in the patients’ best interests, or if they doubt the validity of the ACD. Future ACP programmes should consider approaches to improve the validity and applicability of ACDs. In addition, there is a need for ethical and legal education to support doctors’ knowledge and confidence in ACP and enacting ACDs. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6830700/ /pubmed/31676659 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032638 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Ethics
Moore, Nadia
Detering, Karen M
Low, Tessa
Nolte, Linda
Fraser, Scott
Sellars, Marcus
Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title_full Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title_fullStr Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title_full_unstemmed Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title_short Doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study
title_sort doctors’ perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an australian interview study
topic Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6830700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31676659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032638
work_keys_str_mv AT moorenadia doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy
AT deteringkarenm doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy
AT lowtessa doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy
AT noltelinda doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy
AT fraserscott doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy
AT sellarsmarcus doctorsperspectivesonadheringtoadvancecaredirectiveswhenmakingmedicaldecisionsforpatientsanaustralianinterviewstudy