Surrogate Decision Making: Do We Have to Trade Off Accuracy and Procedural Satisfaction?

被引:18
作者
Frey, Renato [1 ,2 ]
Hertwig, Ralph [2 ]
Herzog, Stefan M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Basel, Ctr Cognit & Decis Sci, CH-4003 Basel, Switzerland
[2] Max Planck Inst Human Dev, Ctr Adapt Rat, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
关键词
end-of-life decisions; surrogate; proxy; preferences; accuracy; shared decision making; PATIENTS RESUSCITATION PREFERENCES; LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENT; ADVANCE DIRECTIVES; SUPPORT INTERVENTION; LIVING WILLS; PHYSICIANS; POPULATION; JUDGMENT; DISEASE; OTHERS;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X12471729
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective. Making surrogate decisions on behalf of incapacitated patients can raise difficult questions for relatives, physicians, and society. Previous research has focused on the accuracy of surrogate decisions (i.e., the proportion of correctly inferred preferences). Less attention has been paid to the procedural satisfaction that patients' surrogates and patients attribute to specific approaches to making surrogate decisions. The objective was to investigate hypothetical patients' and surrogates' procedural satisfaction with specific approaches to making surrogate decisions and whether implementing these preferences would lead to tradeoffs between procedural satisfaction and accuracy. Methods. Study 1 investigated procedural satisfaction by assigning participants (618 in a mixed-age but relatively young online sample and 50 in an older offline sample) to the roles of hypothetical surrogates or patients. Study 2 (involving 64 real multigenerational families with a total of 253 participants) investigated accuracy using 24 medical scenarios. Results. Hypothetical patients and surrogates had closely aligned preferences: Procedural satisfaction was highest with a patient-designated surrogate, followed by shared surrogate decision-making approaches and legally assigned surrogates. These approaches did not differ substantially in accuracy. Limitations are that participants' preferences regarding existing and novel approaches to making surrogate decisions can only be elicited under hypothetical conditions. Conclusions. Next to decision making by patient-designated surrogates, shared surrogate decision making is the preferred approach among patients and surrogates alike. This approach appears to impose no tradeoff between procedural satisfaction and accuracy. Therefore, shared decision making should be further studied in representative samples of the general population, and if people's preferences prove to be robust, they deserve to be weighted more strongly in legal frameworks in addition to patient-designated surrogates.
引用
收藏
页码:258 / 269
页数:12
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
Aiken T.D., 2002, LEGAL ETHICAL ISSUES
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2009, SHARED DECISION MAKI
[3]   Patients derogate physicians who use a computer-assisted diagnostic aid [J].
Arkes, Hal R. ;
Shaffer, Victoria A. ;
Medow, Mitchell A. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2007, 27 (02) :189-202
[4]   Monotonicity in Condorcet's jury theorem with dependent voters [J].
Berend, Daniel ;
Sapir, Luba .
SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2007, 28 (03) :507-528
[5]  
Condorcet Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas de Caritat marquis de, 1994, FDN SOCIAL CHOICE PO
[6]   Inference by eye - Confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data [J].
Cumming, G ;
Finch, S .
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 2005, 60 (02) :170-180
[7]   Advance directives as acts of communication -: A randomized controlled trial [J].
Ditto, PH ;
Danks, JH ;
Smucker, WD ;
Bookwala, J ;
Coppola, KM ;
Dresser, R ;
Fagerlin, A ;
Gready, RM ;
Houts, RM ;
Lockhart, LK ;
Zyzanski, S .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 161 (03) :421-430
[8]   Enough - The failure of the living will [J].
Fagerlin, A ;
Schneider, CE .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2004, 34 (02) :30-42
[9]   Projection in surrogate decisions about life-sustaining medical treatments [J].
Fagerlin, A ;
Ditto, PH ;
Danks, JH ;
Houts, RM ;
Smucker, WD .
HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, 2001, 20 (03) :166-175
[10]   The use of living wills at the end of life - A national study [J].
Hanson, LC ;
Rodgman, E .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1996, 156 (09) :1018-1022