• C-H Huang, W-Y Hu, T-Y Chiu, and C-Y Chen.
• Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine and Hospital, National Taiwan University, No. 7, Chuang-Shan South Road, Taipei 100, Taiwan.
• J Med Ethics. 2008 May 1;34(5):336-40.

ObjectivesTo investigate the current situation of completing the informed consent for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders among the competent patients with terminal illness and the ethical dilemmas related to it.ParticipantsThis study enrolled 152 competent patients with terminal cancer, who were involved in the initial consultations for hospice care.AnalysisComparisons of means, analyses of variance, Student's t test, chi(2) test and multiple logistic regression models.ResultsAfter the consultations, 117 (77.0%) of the 152 patients provided informed consent for hospice care and DNR orders. These included 21 patients (17.9%) who signed the consent by themselves, and 96 (82.1%) whose consent sheet was signed only by family members. The reasons why patients were not involved in the discussions toward the consent (n = 82) included poor physical or psychological condition (44.9%), concerns of the consultant hospice team (37.2%), and the family's refusal (28.2%). On a multivariate analysis, patients' awareness of their poor prognosis (odds ratio = 4.07, 95% confidence interval = 2.05 to 8.07) and their understanding of hospice care (2.27, 1.33 to 3.89) were two independent factors (p < 0.01) that influenced their participation in the discussions or their personal signature in the informed consent.ConclusionThe family-oriented culture in Asian countries may violate the principles of the Patient Self-Determination Act and the requirements of the Hospice Care Law in Taiwan, which inevitably poses an ethical dilemma. Earlier truth-telling and continuing education of the public by hospice care workers will be helpful in solving such ethical dilemmas.

29 keywords...

hide…