Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaEnd-of-Life and Palliative Care

A 62-year-old woman is admitted to the oncology ward for worsening respiratory distress. She has a history of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer with extensive malignant pleural effusions. On physical examination, she is alert and fully oriented but visibly tachypneic with a respiratory rate of 34/min, utilizing accessory muscles of respiration. Despite maximal supplemental oxygen via high-flow nasal cannula, she continues to experience severe air hunger.

During a discussion with the medical team, the patient clearly articulates her understanding that her cancer is progressive and terminal. She states, "I cannot endure this struggling anymore. Please give me medication to ease my breathing, even if it means I might pass away sooner." Recognizing her severe distress and clear decision-making capacity, the attending physician initiates a continuous intravenous infusion of fentanyl to palliate her dyspnea.

Shortly afterward, the patient's husband arrives. He becomes highly agitated upon seeing the infusion pump and demands that the fentanyl be stopped immediately. He insists, "Those strong drugs will shut down her lungs! She just needs a breathing tube temporarily so her body can heal."

Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?

  1. Continue the continuous opioid infusion and explain to the husband that his wife's autonomous decisions take precedenceCevap
  2. B
    Stop the palliative medication and transfer the patient to the intensive care unit for mechanical ventilation
  3. C
    Withhold the infusion and consult psychiatry to establish the patient's legal competence to refuse care
  4. D
    Suspend the administration of symptom-relieving medications until the disagreement can be mediated by an ethics consultant
  5. E
    Comply with the spouse's demand to escalate care, since he acts as the default surrogate decision-maker for his wife

Cevap

Continue the continuous opioid infusion and explain to the husband that his wife's autonomous decisions take precedence.
The correct answer acknowledges two fundamental principles of palliative care and medical ethics: patient autonomy and the principle of double effect. First, the patient is alert, understands her condition, and clearly communicates her wishes, meaning she possesses full decision-making capacity. Therefore, her autonomous refusal of intubation and request for symptom palliation strictly override her husband's demands. Second, administering opioids (like fentanyl) to treat severe, refractory dyspnea at the end of life is the standard of care. Under the principle of double effect, providing such medication is ethically permissible because the physician's primary intent is to relieve suffering, even if a secondary, unintended consequence is respiratory depression that hastens death. The physician should continue the medically appropriate, patient-directed therapy while providing empathetic communication and support to the distressed husband.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Assess the patient's clinical status and decision-making capacity.
The patient is alert, oriented, understands her terminal prognosis, and clearly articulates a rational choice to prioritize comfort over longevity. She possesses intact decision-making capacity.
Establishing capacity is the fundamental first step before determining who has the authority to make medical decisions.
2
Evaluate the ethical justification for the requested treatment.
The administration of opioids to treat severe dyspnea in a terminal patient is ethically and legally justified under the principle of double effect.
The primary intent is to relieve suffering (air hunger), even if there is a foreseeable, but unintended, secondary effect of hastening death.
3
Address the conflict between the capable patient and the family member.
The physician must honor the capable patient's wishes and gently but firmly inform the husband that the patient's autonomous directives supersede his requests.
Surrogate decision-makers have no legal or ethical authority to override the decisions of a patient who has intact decision-making capacity.

Anahtar Kavram

In patients with intact decision-making capacity, their autonomous choices regarding end-of-life care supersede the demands of family members. Furthermore, treating severe dyspnea with opioids is justified by the principle of double effect.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

End-of-Life and Palliative Care

Bu konudan daha fazla soru