Cargando…
Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey
BACKGROUND: In the coming years, surrogate decision-making is expected to become highly prevalent in Japanese clinical practice. Further, there has been a recent increase in activities promoting advance care planning, which potentially affects the manner in which judgements are made by surrogate dec...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7805133/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33435976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00573-4 |
_version_ | 1783636256589086720 |
---|---|
author | Tanaka, Masashi Ohnishi, Kayoko Enzo, Aya Okita, Taketoshi Asai, Atsushi |
author_facet | Tanaka, Masashi Ohnishi, Kayoko Enzo, Aya Okita, Taketoshi Asai, Atsushi |
author_sort | Tanaka, Masashi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the coming years, surrogate decision-making is expected to become highly prevalent in Japanese clinical practice. Further, there has been a recent increase in activities promoting advance care planning, which potentially affects the manner in which judgements are made by surrogate decision-makers. This study aims to clarify the grounds on which surrogate decision-makers in Japan base their judgements. METHODS: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted to examine the judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making for critical life-sustaining treatment choices in acute care hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 228 participants satisfied the inclusion criteria, and 15 were selected for interviews. We qualitatively analysed the content of 14 interview transcripts, excluding one that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Based on this analysis, we extracted 4 core categories, 17 categories, 35 subcategories, and 55 codes regarding judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making. The four core categories were as follows: patient preference-oriented factor (Type 1), patient interest-oriented factor (Type 2), family preference-oriented factor (Type 3), and balanced patient/family preference-oriented factor (Type 4). The Type 4 core category represented attempts to balance the preferences of the patient with those of the surrogate decision-maker. CONCLUSIONS: Surrogate decision-makers based their decisions on important aspects related to a patient’s life, and they considered not only the patient’s preferences and best interests but also their own preferences. As the need for surrogate decisions will increase in the future, decision-makers will need to consider judgement grounds from a more diverse perspective. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7805133 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78051332021-01-14 Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey Tanaka, Masashi Ohnishi, Kayoko Enzo, Aya Okita, Taketoshi Asai, Atsushi BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: In the coming years, surrogate decision-making is expected to become highly prevalent in Japanese clinical practice. Further, there has been a recent increase in activities promoting advance care planning, which potentially affects the manner in which judgements are made by surrogate decision-makers. This study aims to clarify the grounds on which surrogate decision-makers in Japan base their judgements. METHODS: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted to examine the judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making for critical life-sustaining treatment choices in acute care hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 228 participants satisfied the inclusion criteria, and 15 were selected for interviews. We qualitatively analysed the content of 14 interview transcripts, excluding one that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Based on this analysis, we extracted 4 core categories, 17 categories, 35 subcategories, and 55 codes regarding judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making. The four core categories were as follows: patient preference-oriented factor (Type 1), patient interest-oriented factor (Type 2), family preference-oriented factor (Type 3), and balanced patient/family preference-oriented factor (Type 4). The Type 4 core category represented attempts to balance the preferences of the patient with those of the surrogate decision-maker. CONCLUSIONS: Surrogate decision-makers based their decisions on important aspects related to a patient’s life, and they considered not only the patient’s preferences and best interests but also their own preferences. As the need for surrogate decisions will increase in the future, decision-makers will need to consider judgement grounds from a more diverse perspective. BioMed Central 2021-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7805133/ /pubmed/33435976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00573-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Tanaka, Masashi Ohnishi, Kayoko Enzo, Aya Okita, Taketoshi Asai, Atsushi Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title | Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title_full | Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title_fullStr | Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title_short | Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
title_sort | grounds for surrogate decision-making in japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7805133/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33435976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00573-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tanakamasashi groundsforsurrogatedecisionmakinginjapaneseclinicalpracticeaqualitativesurvey AT ohnishikayoko groundsforsurrogatedecisionmakinginjapaneseclinicalpracticeaqualitativesurvey AT enzoaya groundsforsurrogatedecisionmakinginjapaneseclinicalpracticeaqualitativesurvey AT okitataketoshi groundsforsurrogatedecisionmakinginjapaneseclinicalpracticeaqualitativesurvey AT asaiatsushi groundsforsurrogatedecisionmakinginjapaneseclinicalpracticeaqualitativesurvey |