Presentation on theme: "Nicholas J. Kockler, PhD, MS & Lisa Dashiel BSN, RN"— Presentation transcript:
1Nicholas J. Kockler, PhD, MS & Lisa Dashiel BSN, RN Nursing Grand Rounds:December 2012Caring for the ‘Difficult Patient’: Ethical Issues When Patients Do Not Adhere to Medical AdviceNicholas J. Kockler, PhD, MS&Lisa Dashiel BSN, RN
2The ‘ethical’ truth: We have not been bribed (no one has tried). We are not being paid to say or not say anything we would not otherwise say or not say.Everything we say or do not say is on the up-and-up.All our motives are honorable.Erin / Liz – disclaimers / disclosures
3ObjectivesTo recognize difficult patient encounters and their ethical issuesTo identify a range of strategies that might help improve care in so-called difficult patient encounters
4Case 1After his recovery from surgery and placement of a halo and PICC, a patient with cervical osteomyletis wishes to go outside the hospital for a smoke. He has a history of heroin use, and his girlfriend is suspected of bringing him drugs. His father is en route, but they have a strained relationship. The patient escalates his threats to leave against medical advice if not allowed to smoke. Most clinicians agree that this patient has capacity even though they disagree with the risks he wants to take. The patient has refused nicotine patches.
5Question for iClickers: Case 1 What is the most compelling ethical option? Discharge the patient against medical advice because he cannot be trusted to smoke off-campus alone.Have nursing chaperone the patient out to smoke.Have his girlfriend chaperone him out to smoke.Have his father chaperone him out to smoke.Place a “medical hold” for this patient and physically restrain him in his bed.
6Case 2A 28 year-old patient presents with infective endocarditis for the 2nd time. He has a history of intravenous drug use, and he has already received one valve replacement for a previous bout with endocarditis. The patient does not appear to have insight into the relationship between his drug use and his infection. He has never participated in a detox / recovery program. The surgeon wonders if he should perform another valve replacement even though it is medically indicated.
7Question for iClickers: Case 2 What is the most compelling ethical option? Perform the valve replacement and be very aggressive with offering chemical dependency treatment.Do not perform the valve replacement, the patient has demonstrated he is non-compliant with medical advice.Perform the valve replacement this time and as many times as he needs throughout his life: his lifestyle choices should not lead to our discrimination against him.Do not perform the valve replacement until the patient shows a willingness and commitment toward recovery.Perform the valve replacement, be aggressive with chemical dependency treatment (offering of it), and teach the patient how to obtain and use clean needles for his drug use.
8Case 3A 32 year-old woman is admitted through the ED with a rectal foreign body. She has an active history of daily heroin use. The foreign body was surgically removed. On the morning of discharge she becomes irritable, agitated, demanding immediate discharge and throwing things in her room. Security is called for support. Taxi transportation is called and patient is taken to the lobby to wait for its arrival. On the way out of her hospital room, she casually mentions that she was raped, whereas prior to that she had said the foreign body was from consensual sex. It is 48 hours since she was admitted to the hospital. Security is waiting with her in the lobby. After conferring with the physician and ED charge nurse, the patient’s nurse and RN Care Manager go to the lobby to talk with the patient. She appears sedated, having a difficult time keeping her eyes open. Appearance of sedation acknowledged by staff and patient was asked if she had taken any substance other than the two Percocet her nurse had given her three hours earlier. She said, “No”. Staff told her they were concerned about her statement of being raped.
9Question for iClickers: Case 3 What is the most compelling ethical option? Take patient back up to the nursing unit and cancel the hospital discharge.Take the patient to the ED for a sexual assault work up and to monitor sedation.Call the police to report a rape.Insist on a Psychiatric Liaison assessment before she can leave the hospital.Allow her to leave the hospital once her transportation has arrived as she has already been discharged.
10Case 4A 36 year-old patient well known to the ED came in with an ingested foreign body (a pen). After initial work-up, it was determined that another emergent endoscopy (the 6th in 5 months) would be needed to remove the object safely. Clinicians report that the patient is difficult to work with as he is very demanding of staff, persistent about requesting pain medicines, and refuses to see a primary care provider as an outpatient. The endoscopy is performed and the patient immediately leaves against medical advice. The patient demonstrates behaviors consistent with a personality disorder and bipolar disorder, but a formal psychiatric evaluation is nearly impossible because the patient consistently leaves post-surgery before the psychiatric-liaison service can see him. It is only a matter of time before he returns to the ED. The patient has no insurance.
11Question for iClickers: Case 4 What is the most compelling ethical option? Perform the endoscopy and proactively discharge him early.Do not perform the endoscopy as he is stable, do not admit him; evaluate in the ED only.Require the patient to see the psychiatric-liaison consultant as a condition of performing the endoscopy.Perform the endoscopy, enact care plan consistent with best practices / standards of care (even though he is likely to leave early).Place a “medical hold” for this patient and physically restrain him in his bed until we are confident he is ready to be discharged.
12Prevent Default Decisions Minimize Moral Distress ProvidePractical WisdomPrevent Default DecisionsEnsureIntegrityReduce Moral HazardsPromoteFreedomMinimize Moral Distresstechnépraxisethos
13Ethical Decision-making Model (Clinical) Clinical IntegrityBeneficenceAutonomyJustice / NonmaleficenceEthical Decision-making Model (Clinical)
14Foundational Questions… Is this an honest / right practice of medicine?Do my actions demonstrate professionalism?Clinical IntegrityIs this intervention / practice dependable for delivering clinical benefit?BeneficenceAre we fair to the patient in consideration of his/her worldview and life plan?AutonomyCan we explain protections for this patient or for others? Can we account for our actions in light of broader traditions?Justice / Nonmaleficence
15Moral Hazards in Difficult Patient Encounters Risk of decision-making following an ad hominem judgment (logical fallacy): Exclusively blaming the difficulty on the patient, myopia of what else might be going onSelf-fulfilling prophecyGroupthinkDiffusion of responsibilityTherapeutic nihilism: The idea or bias that such patients can’t be helpedPatient abandonment: Prematurely or inappropriately “firing” a patientRisk of harm to self or other by patient
17Internal Indicators of Physician Strategies Dependent Clingers NameDescriptionInternal Indicators of PhysicianStrategiesDependent ClingersEscalation from mild/appropriate requests for reassurance to endless, repeated requests for all forms of attention; naïve about effect on physician; self-perception of bottomless need and of the physician as inexhaustibleAversion to the patient(may begin as a feeling like “puppy love” to the patient due to expressions of gratitude made by patient)Inform patient early, tactfully, and firmly of limits and realistic expectationsEntitled DemandersSimilar to clingers in neediness, but use intimidation, devaluation, and guilt-induction to control doctor; may threaten punishment; patient likely fears abandonment; exude innate deservednessFearful of impact on reputation, enraged that patient is not cooperative/grateful, [secretly] ashamed as if patient’s demands/comments are realisticNever challenge patient’s sense of entitlement, but rechannel it toward indicated therapy; repetition of theme of acceptance and redirecting/reframing of patient’s demandsManipulative Help-RejectersHave profound neediness, but they are not seductive and grateful (cf. clingers) and are not overtly hostile (cf. demanders) – they feel no regimen will help: they are pessimistic, which may appear to increase in direct proportion to doctor’s efforts and enthusiasm; desire is relationship with caregiver, not necessarily relief of symptomsAnxiety about comprehensiveness in care; irritation with the patient; and then depression and self-doubtMay be helpful to ‘share’ patient’s pessimism; use of regular follow-up visits determined by the doctor may help with maintenance (and patient’s fear partly allayed); if psychiatric referral is indicated, scheduling another appointment after the consultation may communicate the persistence of the doctor-patient relationshipSelf-Destructive DeniersDisplays of unconscious self-murderous behaviors; at baseline very dependent and given up hope of ever having needs met; may appear to find pleasure in defeating physicians attempts to preserve his/her life; “chronic suicidal behavior”Wish that patient would die and “get it over with”; malice toward the patient may transform into guilt or self-reproach or into dread, self-blame, hopeless attitude; may evoke all of the other negative emotions as described aboveOptions are quite limited; psychiatric consultation (to assess whether treatable depression is present); perseverance to provide compassionate care; consider reframing care plan toward palliative and/or harm reduction goals; avoid abandonment
18Two Questions: What makes the encounter with this person difficult? What makes this person a patient?
19Difficult Patient Encounters: What’s in the Differential Diagnosis? Rule-out psychiatric / neurological illnessRule-out psychosocial stressorsRule-out cultural and linguistic barriersRule-out systemic barriersRule-out logistical or practical barriersTo answer question 1, consider the differential diagnosis…
20Therapeutic Relationship Difficult Patient Encounters: What’s the basis of the therapeutic relationship?Do you agree on goals?If no, what’s your BATNA*?Do you agree on interventions?Do you have a bond with this patient?If no, how can you bridge the gap?Therapeutic RelationshipGoalsTasksBondTo answer question 2, consider three components to the therapeutic relationship… If you don’t have any one of these, there may not be a therapeutic relationship.While Goals of Care are of primary importance, a Bond is a necessary and sufficient condition of having a “therapeutic” relationship. Think of “bonds” to which we are bound by law.*BATNA = Best Alternative To No [or Negotiated] Agreement”
21Benefit versus No Harm Beneficence Nonmaleficence Obligations… to support and provide medical goods (benefits)to protect others from harmObligations not…to inflict harm, orto expose to risks of harmWhether there was an absence of due care (negligence) by respecting patient choices in the context of continuing the therapeutic relationshipAcuteCure / FixRescueChronicManage illnessPalliativeManage pain, symptoms, and QoLProfessional model of due care (B&C, p. 154):-The professional must have a duty to the affected party;-The professional must breach that duty;-The affected party must experience a harm;-The harm must be caused by the breach of duty.
22Harm Reduction Care Planning Demonstrate hospitality: Walk the line between tolerance and intoleranceGuard against complicity by offering a range of services to address undesirable behavior (e.g., substance use) and yet acknowledging its occurrenceSet parameters for cooperation with illicit or undesirable behaviorCraft care plans toReduce the negative consequences of bad behavior when they happenManage the risks of bad behavior through diligent monitoring and other preventative strategies when feasibleEstablish [intermediate?] goal as harm reduction, not benefit per se (in light of continuation of bad behavior)Enhance patients’ abilities to comply with medical advice (incentives, deterrents, etc.)Acknowledgement is not endorsement if therapeutic relationship is based on mutual understanding that practitioners wish patients to end choices that prohibit or inhibit achievement of medical good/clinical benefit for the patients… Acknowledgement as tolerance can be an implicit endorsement whereas acknowledgement in the context of caring hospitality can be “tolerance” with a desire or wish to change behavior or make it safer if it is to continue.Hospitality – Tolerance – Complicity – Cooperation (a spectrum of the therapeutic relationship in harm reduction?)
23Question for iClickers: Case 4 (Revisited) What is the most compelling ethical option? Perform the endoscopy and proactively discharge him early.Do not perform the endoscopy as he is stable, do not admit him; evaluate in the ED only.Require the patient to see the psychiatric-liaison consultant as a condition of performing the endoscopy.Perform the endoscopy, enact care plan consistent with best practices / standards of care (even though he is likely to leave early).Place a “medical hold” for this patient and physically restrain him in his bed until we are confident he is ready to be discharged.
24Difficult Patient Encounters: When to ask for an ethics consult? When there is concern or uncertainty about any of the following issues:Duty to protect patients from self-harmObligation to benefit/offer services/continue careSevering therapeutic relationship vs. settingJustice obligations to protect self / staff from threatening patients
25Difficult Patient Encounters: What can an ethics consultant do? Reframe the problemModel curiosity about the patient as personSuggest refocusing on goals of the medical encounterEncourage practitioners to learn other skillsAppreciate clinician frustrationOffer moral supportRecognize or affirm the limits of the team to influence healthSummarize the differences in perspectives and recommendations that may be challengingClarify the roles of the obligation to benefit patients versus the duty to protectHelp interpret a patient’s capacity to make decisions or an inability to assess capacity in decision-making