
The episode discusses a study on how clinicians approach non-beneficial life-prolonging treatments and the ethical implications of their decisions.
Today's podcast is a natural follow up to our podcasts on Slow Codes and Unilateral DNR orders .Today we talk about a new study about how clinicians talk about potentially non-beneficial life-prolonging treatments , published in JAMA Network Open. Do they adhere to society guidelines, which allow as permissible approaches only shared decision-making and following institutional policy. Or do they take alternative approaches, like not offering interventions, not mentioning interventions, or simply stating a plan to limit interventions? Turns out doctors are using these alternative approaches frequently. Our guests are Jason Batten, Liz Dzeng, and Teva Brender, all clinicians, all of whom have been thinking about and wrestling with the ethical reasoning behind these approaches. We all admit to using these approaches. Are the alternative approaches wicked games (song hint), and our response should be to stop these behaviors, beginning with ourselves? After all, if you ask patients or surrogates, they're likely to say they want all the options and may not universally welcome recommendations . Or, as with slow codes, does the fact that these alternative approaches are in common use…
Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the GeriPal - A Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine Podcast podcast page.