Health Care Providers' Experiences with Implementing Medical Aid-in-Dying in Vermont: a Qualitative Study.
end-of-life care
ethics
health policy
medical aid-in-dying
qualitative research
Journal
Journal of general internal medicine
ISSN: 1525-1497
Titre abrégé: J Gen Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8605834
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2019
04 2019
Historique:
received:
03
05
2018
accepted:
06
12
2018
revised:
22
10
2018
pubmed:
27
1
2019
medline:
9
9
2020
entrez:
27
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The evolving legal landscape for medical aid-in-dying (AID) in the USA raises clinical and public health challenges and concerns regarding how health care providers will accommodate AID while expanding access to high-quality end-of-life care. To describe Vermont health care providers' experiences practicing under the "Patient Choice and Control at End of Life" Act. Qualitative semi-structured interviews analyzed using grounded theory. The larger study included 144 health care providers, terminally ill patients, caregivers, policy stakeholders, and other Vermont residents working in 10 out of Vermont's 14 counties. This article reports on a subset of 37 providers who had clinical experience with the law. Themes from interviews. Physicians were roughly split between hospital and community-based practices. Most were women (68%) and the largest subgroup specialized in internal or family medicine (53%). Most of the nurses and social workers were women (89%) and most worked for hospice and home health agencies (61%). We identified five domains in which participants engaged with AID: (1) clinical communication and counseling; (2) the Act 39 protocol; (3) prescribing medication; (4) planning for death; and (5) professional education. How providers experienced these five domains of clinical practice depended on their practice setting and the supportive resources available. Health care providers' participation in AID involves clinical tasks outside of responding to patients' requests and writing prescriptions. Research to identify best practices should focus on all domains of clinical practice in order to best prepare providers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The evolving legal landscape for medical aid-in-dying (AID) in the USA raises clinical and public health challenges and concerns regarding how health care providers will accommodate AID while expanding access to high-quality end-of-life care.
OBJECTIVE
To describe Vermont health care providers' experiences practicing under the "Patient Choice and Control at End of Life" Act.
DESIGN
Qualitative semi-structured interviews analyzed using grounded theory.
PARTICIPANTS
The larger study included 144 health care providers, terminally ill patients, caregivers, policy stakeholders, and other Vermont residents working in 10 out of Vermont's 14 counties. This article reports on a subset of 37 providers who had clinical experience with the law.
MAIN MEASURES
Themes from interviews.
KEY RESULTS
Physicians were roughly split between hospital and community-based practices. Most were women (68%) and the largest subgroup specialized in internal or family medicine (53%). Most of the nurses and social workers were women (89%) and most worked for hospice and home health agencies (61%). We identified five domains in which participants engaged with AID: (1) clinical communication and counseling; (2) the Act 39 protocol; (3) prescribing medication; (4) planning for death; and (5) professional education. How providers experienced these five domains of clinical practice depended on their practice setting and the supportive resources available.
CONCLUSION
Health care providers' participation in AID involves clinical tasks outside of responding to patients' requests and writing prescriptions. Research to identify best practices should focus on all domains of clinical practice in order to best prepare providers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30684201
doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4811-1
pii: 10.1007/s11606-018-4811-1
pmc: PMC6445925
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
636-641Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : T32 GM008719
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
N Engl J Med. 2013 Apr 11;368(15):1417-24
pubmed: 23574120
Contraception. 2015 Jun;91(6):507-12
pubmed: 25746295
J Palliat Med. 2004 Jun;7(3):451-61
pubmed: 15265355
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Mar 21;132(6):482-7
pubmed: 10733449
Gerontologist. 2014 Oct;54(5):808-17
pubmed: 24000266
JAMA. 2016 Jan 19;315(3):245-6
pubmed: 26784762
JAMA. 2001 May 9;285(18):2363-9
pubmed: 11343484
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014 Jan;47(1):137-53
pubmed: 23830529
Arch Intern Med. 2002 Jun 10;162(11):1257-65
pubmed: 12038944
Palliat Med. 2004 Dec;18(8):685-91
pubmed: 15623164
Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
pubmed: 10940958
Policy Brief UCLA Cent Health Policy Res. 2016 May;(PB2016-4):1-8
pubmed: 27416645
Mich Law Rev. 2008 Jun;106(8):1613-40
pubmed: 18595218
Arch Intern Med. 2001 Mar 12;161(5):657-63
pubmed: 11231697
Am J Public Health. 2017 Jun;107(6):883-888
pubmed: 28426307
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Oct 17;167(8):597-598
pubmed: 28975245
Neurology. 2016 Nov 15;87(20):2117-2122
pubmed: 27770068
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Oct 17;167(8):576-578
pubmed: 28975242
JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Apr;176(4):427-8
pubmed: 26927872
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2012 May;29(3):227-35
pubmed: 21868430
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Mar 21;132(6):494-9
pubmed: 10733451
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Mar 1;178(3):417-421
pubmed: 29279895
N Engl J Med. 2002 Aug 22;347(8):582-8
pubmed: 12192019
N Engl J Med. 2000 Feb 24;342(8):557-63
pubmed: 10684915
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jul 1;177(7):907-908
pubmed: 28531248