Search

ContextThe American Medical System is programmed to a default setting of aggressive care for the terminally ill. Institutional norms of decision making have been shown to promote high-intensity care, regardless of consistency with patient preferences. There are myriad factors at a system, clinician, surrogate, and patient level that drive the culture of overly aggressive treatments in American hospitals.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to understand physician perspective of the ways systems-level factors influence patient, physician, and surrogate perceptions and consequent behavior.MethodsSemi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews with 42 internal medicine physicians across three American academic medical centers were conducted. This qualitative study was exploratory in nature, intended to enhance conceptual understanding of underlying phenomena that drive physician attitudes and behavior.ResultsThe interviews revealed many factors that contributed to overly aggressive treatments at the end of life. Systemic factors, which describe underlying cultures (including institutional, professional, or community-based cultures), typical practices of care, or systemic defaults that drive patterns of care, manifested its influence both directly and through its impact on patient, surrogate, and physician behaviors and attitudes.ConclusionInstitutional cultures, social norms, and systemic defaults influence both normative beliefs regarding standards of care and treatments plans that may not benefit seriously ill patients.

BackgroundEthical challenges are common in end of life care; the uncertainty of prognosis and the ethically permissible boundaries of treatment create confusion and conflict about the balance between benefits and burdens experienced by patients.ObjectiveWe asked physician trainees in internal medicine how they reacted and responded to ethical challenges arising in the context of perceived futile treatments at the end of life and how these challenges contribute to moral distress.DesignSemi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews.ParticipantsTwenty-two internal medicine residents and fellows across three American academic medical centers.ApproachThis study uses systematic qualitative methods of data gathering, analysis and interpretation.Key resultsPhysician trainees experienced significant moral distress when they felt obligated to provide treatments at or near the end of life that they believed to be futile. Some trainees developed detached and dehumanizing attitudes towards patients as a coping mechanism, which may contribute to a loss of empathy. Successful coping strategies included formal and informal conversations with colleagues and superiors about the emotional and ethical challenges of providing care at the end of life.ConclusionsMoral distress amongst physician trainees may occur when they feel obligated to provide treatments at the end of life that they believe to be futile or harmful.

Context: The American Medical System is programmed to a default setting of aggressive care for the terminally ill. Institutional norms of decision making have been shown to promote high-intensity care, regardless of consistency with patient preferences. There are myriad factors at a system, clinician, surrogate, and patient level that drive the culture of overly aggressive treatments in American hospitals.Objective: The objective of this study was to understand physician perspective of the ways systems-level factors influence patient, physician, and surrogate perceptions and consequent behavior.Methods: Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews with 42 internal medicine physicians across three American academic medical centers were conducted. This qualitative study was exploratory in nature, intended to enhance conceptual understanding of underlying phenomena that drive physician attitudes and behavior.Results: The interviews revealed many factors that contributed to overly aggressive treatments at the end of life. Systemic factors, which describe underlying cultures (including institutional, professional, or community-based cultures), typical practices of care, or systemic defaults that drive patterns of care, manifested its influence both directly and through its impact on patient, surrogate, and physician behaviors and attitudes.Conclusion: Institutional cultures, social norms, and systemic defaults influence both normative beliefs regarding standards of care and treatments plans that may not benefit seriously ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]