Phil B.FontanarosaMD, Deputy EditorIndividualAuthorMargaret A.WinkerMD, Deputy EditorIndividualAuthorStephen J.LurieMD, PhD, Fishbein FellowIndividualAuthor
Copyright 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.2000
In Reply: The loss of information during the
transition from outpatient care to the hospital creates ethical dilemmas for
physicians and patients. As pointed out by Dr Brickner and Ms Drought, discussions
about resuscitation status and end-of-life care are particularly susceptible
to confusion. A readily available form that clearly documents a patient's
wishes could help resolve ambiguities about the patient's goals for care.1 The preferred intensity of treatment form described
by Brickner and Drought represents a creative approach. Such a document may
encourage physicians and patients to discuss preferences for care and could
guide the content of these conversations. Nonetheless, even a thorough and
revealing discussion with a trusted primary care physician may not address
an issue such as the massive pulmonary embolus experienced by the patient
in our case.
Pantilat SZ, Alpers A, Wachter RM. The Hospitalist's Role in Advance-Care Directives—Reply. JAMA. 2000;283(3):336-337. doi:10-1001/pubs.JAMA-ISSN-0098-7484-283-3-jac90010