A Reflective Case Study in Family Medicine Advance Care Planning Conversations

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Buchanan AE,
   2. Brock DW

   . Deciding for others: The ethics of surrogate decision making. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
2. 2.↵
   1. Teno J,
   2. Lynn J,
   3. Wenger N,
   4. et al

   . Advance directives for seriously ill hospitalized patients: effectiveness with the patient self-determination act and the SUPPORT intervention. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45:500–7.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Teno JM,
   2. Licks S,
   3. Lynn J,
   4. et al

   . Do advance directives provide instructions that direct care? SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45:508–12.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Tunzi M

   . Advance care directives: realities and challenges in Central California. J Clin Ethics 2011;22:239–48.

   OpenUrlPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Shalowitz DI,
   2. Garrett-Mayer E,
   3. Wendler D

   . The accuracy of surrogate decision makers: A systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:493–7.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Ditto PH,
   2. Danks JH,
   3. Smucker WD,
   4. et al

   . Advance directives as acts of communication: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:421–30.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Torke AM,
   2. Alexander GC,
   3. Lantos J

   . Substituted judgment: The limitations of autonomy in surrogate decision making. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23:1514–7.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Sulmasy DP,
   2. Terry PB,
   3. Weisman CS,
   4. et al

   . The accuracy of substituted judgments in patients with terminal diagnoses. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:621–9.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Fried TR,
   2. O'Leary J,
   3. Van Ness P,
   4. Fraenkel L

   . Inconsistency over time in the preferences of older persons with advanced illness for life-sustaining treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007;55:1007–14.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Ditto PH,
    2. Smucker WD,
    3. Danks JH,
    4. et al

    . Stability of older adults' preferences for life-sustaining medical treatment. Health Psychol 2003;22:605–15.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Lo B

    . Resolving ethical dilemmas. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
12. 12.↵
    1. Wendler D,
    2. Rid A

    . Systematic review: The effect on surrogates of making treatment decisions for others. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:336–46.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    1. Scheunemann LP,
    2. Cunningham TV,
    3. Arnold RM,
    4. Buddadhumaruk P,
    5. White DB

    . How clinicians discuss critically ill patients' preferences and values with surrogates: An empirical analysis. Crit Care Med 2015;43:757–64.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Lum HD,
    2. Sudore RL,
    3. Matlock DD,
    4. et al

    . A group visit initiative improves advance care planning documentation among older adults in primary care. J Am Board Fam Med 2017;30:480–90.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Chiarchiaro J,
    2. Buddadhumaruk P,
    3. Arnold RM,
    4. White DB

    . Prior advance care planning is associated with less decisional conflict among surrogates for critically ill patients. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015;12:1528–33.

    OpenUrl
16. 16.↵
    1. Sulmasy DP,
    2. Hughes MT,
    3. Yenokyan G,
    4. et al

    . The trial of ascertaining individual preferences for loved ones' role in end-of-life decisions (TAILORED) study: A randomized controlled trial to improve surrogate decision making. J Pain Symptom Manage 2017;54:455–65.

    OpenUrl
17. 17.↵
    1. Spoelhof GD,
    2. Elliott B

    . Implementing advance directives in office practice. Am Fam Physician 2012;85:461–6.

    OpenUrlPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Dhillon K,
    2. Jerome D,
    3. Teeluck R,
    4. Yu Y

    . Advance care planning in family medicine training. Can Fam Physician 2018;64:394–6.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Sulmasy DP,
    2. Snyder L

    . Substituted interests and best judgments: An integrated model of surrogate decision making. JAMA 2010;304:1946–7.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Torke AM,
    2. Petronio S,
    3. Sachs GA,
    4. Helft PR,
    5. Purnell C

    . A conceptual model of the role of communication in surrogate decision making for hospitalized adults. Patient Educ Couns 2012;87:54–61.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Vig EK,
    2. Taylor JS,
    3. Starks H,
    4. Hopley EK,
    5. Fryer-Edwards K

    . Beyond substituted judgment: How surrogates navigate end-of-life decision-making. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54:1688–93.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    1. Berger JT,
    2. DeRenzo EG,
    3. Schwartz J

    . Surrogate decision making: Reconciling ethical theory and clinical practice. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:48–53.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Sudore RL,
    2. Fried TR

    . Redefining the “planning” in advance care planning: Preparing for end-of-life decision making. Ann Intern Med 2010;153:256–61.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Tunzi M

    . A new standard for incapacitated patient decision making: The clinical standard of surrogate empowerment. J Clin Ethics 2012;23:316–30.

    OpenUrl
25. 25.↵
    1. Tunzi M,
    2. Ventres W

    . Family medicine ethics: An integrative approach. Fam Med 2018;50:583–8.

    OpenUrl
26. 26.↵
    1. Emanuel LL,
    2. Emanuel EJ

    . The medical directive: A new comprehensive advance care planning document. JAMA 1989;261:3288–93.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Doukas DJ,
    2. McCullough LB

    . The values history. The evaluation of the patient's values and advance directives. J Fam Pract 1991;32:145–53.

    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    American Bar Association, Commission on Law and Aging. Consumer's toolkit for health care advance planning. 2nd ed. 2005. Available from: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_aging/resources/health_care_decision_making/consumer_s_toolkit_for_health_care_advance_planning.html. Accessed November 11, 2017.
29. 29.↵
    Aging with Dignity. The 5 Wishes. 2017. Available from: https://www.agingwithdignity.org/five-wishes/about-five-wishes. Accessed November 11, 2017.
30. 30.↵
    1. Satin DJ,
    2. Swenson SA,
    3. Stovitz SD

    . Effectively engaging patients in everyday health-care decisions. J Fam Pract 2017;66:E1–E6.

    OpenUrl
31. 31.↵
    1. Beauchamp TL,
    2. Childress JF

    . Principles of biomedical ethics. 7th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2013.
32. 32.↵
    1. Jonsen AR

    . Casuistry: An alternative or complement to principles? Kennedy Inst Ethics J 1995;5:237–51.

    OpenUrl
33. 33.↵
    1. Jonsen AR,
    2. Siegler M,
    3. Winslade WJ

    . Clinical ethics: A practical approach to ethical decisions in clinical medicine. 8th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2015.
34. 34.↵
    1. Pellegrino ED,
    2. Thomasma DC

    . The virtues in medical practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1993.
35. 35.↵
    1. Gert B,
    2. Culver CM,
    3. Clouser KD

    . Bioethics: A systematic approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006.
36. 36.↵
    1. Charon R,
    2. Montello M

    . Stories matter: The role of narrative in medical ethics. New York, NY: Routledge; 2002.
37. 37.↵
    1. Tong R

    . The ethics of care: A feminist virtue ethics of care for healthcare practitioners. J Med Philos 1998;23:131–52.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    1. Rid A,
    2. Wendler D

    . Can we improve treatment decision-making for incapacitated patients? Hastings Cent Rep 2010;40:36–45.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science