Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas
Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Grant, Scott B. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2014 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: World Journal of Surgery - Springer-Verlag, 1996, 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:38 ; year:2014 ; number:7 ; day:22 ; month:05 ; pages:1631-1637 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR003448347 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR003448347 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230328140134.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201001s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR003448347 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Grant, Scott B. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2014 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Palliative Care |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palliative Care Specialist |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palliative Care Team |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palliative Care Consultation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Medical Futility |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Modi, Parth K. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Singer, Eric A. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t World Journal of Surgery |d Springer-Verlag, 1996 |g 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 |w (DE-627)SPR003391159 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:38 |g year:2014 |g number:7 |g day:22 |g month:05 |g pages:1631-1637 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 38 |j 2014 |e 7 |b 22 |c 05 |h 1631-1637 | ||
| author_variant |
s b g sb sbg p k m pk pkm e a s ea eas |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
grantscottbmodiparthksingererica:2014----:uiiynteaefugclains |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2014 |
| publishDate |
2014 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Grant, Scott B. verfasserin aut Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modi, Parth K. aut Singer, Eric A. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 38 2014 7 22 05 1631-1637 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Grant, Scott B. verfasserin aut Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modi, Parth K. aut Singer, Eric A. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 38 2014 7 22 05 1631-1637 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Grant, Scott B. verfasserin aut Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modi, Parth K. aut Singer, Eric A. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 38 2014 7 22 05 1631-1637 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Grant, Scott B. verfasserin aut Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modi, Parth K. aut Singer, Eric A. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 38 2014 7 22 05 1631-1637 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Grant, Scott B. verfasserin aut Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modi, Parth K. aut Singer, Eric A. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 38 2014 7 22 05 1631-1637 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637 volume:38 year:2014 number:7 day:22 month:05 pages:1631-1637 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Palliative Care Palliative Care Specialist Palliative Care Team Palliative Care Consultation Medical Futility |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Grant, Scott B. @@aut@@ Modi, Parth K. @@aut@@ Singer, Eric A. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2014-05-22T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
SPR003391159 |
| id |
SPR003448347 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003448347</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328140134.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003448347</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grant, Scott B.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Specialist</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Team</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Consultation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Medical Futility</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Modi, Parth K.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Singer, Eric A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:38</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">number:7</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1631-1637</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">38</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="e">7</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield><subfield code="h">1631-1637</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Grant, Scott B. |
| spellingShingle |
Grant, Scott B. misc Palliative Care misc Palliative Care Specialist misc Palliative Care Team misc Palliative Care Consultation misc Medical Futility Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| authorStr |
Grant, Scott B. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas Palliative Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Specialist (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Team (dpeaa)DE-He213 Palliative Care Consultation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Medical Futility (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Palliative Care misc Palliative Care Specialist misc Palliative Care Team misc Palliative Care Consultation misc Medical Futility |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Palliative Care misc Palliative Care Specialist misc Palliative Care Team misc Palliative Care Consultation misc Medical Futility |
| topic_browse |
misc Palliative Care misc Palliative Care Specialist misc Palliative Care Team misc Palliative Care Consultation misc Medical Futility |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
SPR003391159 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| title |
Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR003448347 (SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e |
| title_full |
Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| author_sort |
Grant, Scott B. |
| journal |
World Journal of Surgery |
| journalStr |
World Journal of Surgery |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2014 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1631 |
| author_browse |
Grant, Scott B. Modi, Parth K. Singer, Eric A. |
| container_volume |
38 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Grant, Scott B. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |
| title_sort |
futility and the care of surgical patients: ethical dilemmas |
| title_auth |
Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| abstract |
Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER |
| container_issue |
7 |
| title_short |
Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Modi, Parth K. Singer, Eric A. |
| author2Str |
Modi, Parth K. Singer, Eric A. |
| ppnlink |
SPR003391159 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T19:32:30.514Z |
| _version_ |
1803587577986416640 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003448347</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328140134.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003448347</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-014-2592-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grant, Scott B.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Futility and the Care of Surgical Patients: Ethical Dilemmas</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Futility has been a contentious topic in medicine for several decades. Surgery in critical or end-of-life situations often raises difficult questions about futility. In this article, we discuss the definition of futility, methods for resolving futility disputes, and some ways to reframe the futility debate to a more fruitful discussion about the goals of care, better communication between surgeon and patient/surrogate, and palliative surgical care. Many definitions of futile therapy have been discussed. The most controversial of these is “qualitative futility” which describes a situation in which the treatment provided is likely to result in an unacceptable quality of life. This is an area of continued controversy because it has been impossible to identify universally held beliefs about acceptable quality of life. Many authors have described methods for resolving futility disputes, including community standards and legalistic multi-step due process protocols. Others, however, have abandoned the concept of futility altogether as an unhelpful term. Reframing the issue of futility as one of inadequate physician–patient communication, these authors have advocated for methods of improving communication and strengthening the patient–physician relationship. Finally, we discuss the utilization of consultants who may be of use in resolving futility disputes: ethics committees, palliative care specialists, pastoral care teams, and dedicated patient advocates. Involving these specialists in a futility conflict can help improve communication and provide invaluable assistance in arriving at the appropriate treatment decision.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Specialist</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Team</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palliative Care Consultation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Medical Futility</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Modi, Parth K.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Singer, Eric A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">38(2014), 7 vom: 22. Mai, Seite 1631-1637</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:38</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">number:7</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1631-1637</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2592-1</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">38</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="e">7</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield><subfield code="h">1631-1637</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.399988 |