Drugs, delirium, and ethics at the end of life

Author:

Thomas Columba1ORCID,Alici Yesne23,Breitbart William2,Bruera Eduardo4,Blackler Liz5ORCID,Sulmasy Daniel P.16

Affiliation:

1. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Georgetown University Washington DC USA

2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York New York USA

3. Weill Cornell Medical College New York New York USA

4. Department of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation, and Integrative Medicine The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston Texas USA

5. Ethics Committee, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York New York USA

6. Departments of Medicine and Philosophy and the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics Georgetown University Washington DC USA

Abstract

AbstractFor older persons with delirium at the end of life, treatment involves complex trade‐offs and highly value‐sensitive decisions. The principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice establish important parameters but lack the structure necessary to guide clinicians in the optimal management of these patients. We propose a set of ethical rules to guide therapeutics—the canons of therapy—as a toolset to help clinicians deliberate about the competing concerns involved in the management of older patients with delirium at the end of life. These canons are standards of judgment that reflect how many experienced clinicians already intuitively practice, but which are helpful to articulate and apply as basic building blocks for a relatively neglected but emerging ethics of therapy. The canons of therapy most pertinent to the care of patients with delirium at the end of life are as follows: (1) restoration, which counsels that the goal of all treatment is to restore the patient, as much as possible, to homeostatic equilibrium; (2) means‐end proportionality, which holds that every treatment should be well‐fitted to the intended goal or end; (3) discretion, which counsels that an awareness of the limits of medical knowledge and practice should guide all treatment decisions; and (4) parsimony, which maintains that only as much therapeutic force as is necessary should be used to achieve the therapeutic goal. Carefully weighed and applied, these canons of therapy may provide the ethical structure needed to help clinicians optimally navigate complex cases.

Funder

McDonald Agape Foundation

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Geriatrics and Gerontology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3