Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 2/2020

29.04.2020 | Scientific Contribution

Decision-making capacity: from testing to evaluation

verfasst von: Helena Hermann, Martin Feuz, Manuel Trachsel, Nikola Biller-Andorno

Erschienen in: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy | Ausgabe 2/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Decision-making capacity (DMC) is the gatekeeping element for a patient’s right to self-determination with regard to medical decisions. A DMC evaluation is not only conducted on descriptive grounds but is an inherently normative task including ethical reasoning. Therefore, it is dependent to a considerable extent on the values held by the clinicians involved in the DMC evaluation. Dealing with the question of how to reasonably support clinicians in arriving at a DMC judgment, a new tool is presented that fundamentally differs from existing ones: the U-Doc. By putting greater emphasis on the judgmental process rather than on the measurement of mental abilities, the clinician as a decision-maker is brought into focus, rendering the tool more of an evaluation guide than a test instrument. In a qualitative study, the perceived benefits of and difficulties with the tool have been explored. The findings show on the one hand that the evaluation aid provides basic orientation, supports a holistic perspective on the patient, sensitizes for ethical considerations and personal biases, and helps to think through the decision, to argue, and to justify one’s judgment. On the other hand, the room for interpretation due to absent operationalisations, related ambiguities, and the confrontation with one’s own subjectivity may be experienced as unsettling.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
When patients are judged to be incompetent their will is still relevant. However, decision making will be guided by their will as previously expressed in advance directives or as presumed by surrogates. The patient may be consulted about the decision that needs to be taken but will at this point not have the authority (and responsibility) to make the decision him- or herself. .
 
2
„U” stands for the Swiss German term „Urteilsfähigkeit“(decision-making capacity).
 
3
The tool was developed alongside guidelines on the evaluation of decision-making capacity in medical practice issued by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences in 2019 and is consistent with the guidelines’ set of core principles (cf. https://​www.​samw.​ch/​en/​Publications/​Medical-ethical-Guidelines.​html).
 
4
The U-Doc has been included in the official guidelines on DMC published 2018 by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (SAMS): https://​www.​samw.​ch/​de/​Ethik/​Autonomie-in-der-Medizin/​Beurteilung-der-Urteilsfaehigkei​t.​html (last accessed on March 31, 2019).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Berghmans, Ron, Donna Dickenson, and Ruud Ter Meulen. 2004. Mental capacity: In search of alternative perspectives. Health Care Analysis 12: 251–263.CrossRef Berghmans, Ron, Donna Dickenson, and Ruud Ter Meulen. 2004. Mental capacity: In search of alternative perspectives. Health Care Analysis 12: 251–263.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3: 77–101.CrossRef Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3: 77–101.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Charland, Louis C. 2001. Mental competence and value: The problem of normativity in the assessment of decisional capacity. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law. 8: 135–145.CrossRef Charland, Louis C. 2001. Mental competence and value: The problem of normativity in the assessment of decisional capacity. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law. 8: 135–145.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat den Hartogh, Govert. 2016. Do we need a threshold conception of competence? Medicine, Healthcare and Philosophy. 19 (1): 71–83.CrossRef den Hartogh, Govert. 2016. Do we need a threshold conception of competence? Medicine, Healthcare and Philosophy. 19 (1): 71–83.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Etchells, Edward, Peteris Darzins, Michel Silberfeld, et al. 1999. Assessment of patient capacity to consent to treatment. Journal of General Internal Medicine 14 (1): 27–34.CrossRef Etchells, Edward, Peteris Darzins, Michel Silberfeld, et al. 1999. Assessment of patient capacity to consent to treatment. Journal of General Internal Medicine 14 (1): 27–34.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Faden, Ruth R., and Tom L. Beauchamp. 1986. A history of informed consent. New York: Oxford University Press. Faden, Ruth R., and Tom L. Beauchamp. 1986. A history of informed consent. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1995a. Comparison of standards for assessing patients‘capacities to make treatment decisions. American Journal of Psychiatry 152: 1033–1037.CrossRef Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1995a. Comparison of standards for assessing patients‘capacities to make treatment decisions. American Journal of Psychiatry 152: 1033–1037.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1995b. The MacArthur competence study. III. Abilities of patients to consent to psychiatric and mental treatments. Law and Human Behavior 19: 149–174.CrossRef Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1995b. The MacArthur competence study. III. Abilities of patients to consent to psychiatric and mental treatments. Law and Human Behavior 19: 149–174.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1996. Values and limits of the MacArthur Treatment Competence Study. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 2: 167–181.CrossRef Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1996. Values and limits of the MacArthur Treatment Competence Study. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 2: 167–181.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1998a. MacArthur competence assessment tool for treatment (MacCAT-T). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press. Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1998a. MacArthur competence assessment tool for treatment (MacCAT-T). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1998b. Assessing competence to consent to treatment: A guide for physicians and other health professionals. New York: Oxford University Press. Grisso, Thomas, and Paul S. Appelbaum. 1998b. Assessing competence to consent to treatment: A guide for physicians and other health professionals. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Lamont, Scott, Yun-Hee Jeon, and Mary Chiarella. 2013. Assessing patient capacity to consent to treatment: An integrative review of instruments and tools. Journal of Clinical Nursing 22: 2387–2403.CrossRef Lamont, Scott, Yun-Hee Jeon, and Mary Chiarella. 2013. Assessing patient capacity to consent to treatment: An integrative review of instruments and tools. Journal of Clinical Nursing 22: 2387–2403.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Nicholson, Timothy R.J., William Cutter, and Mathew Hotopf. 2008. Assessing mental capacity: The mental capacity act. BMJ 336 (7639): 322–325.CrossRef Nicholson, Timothy R.J., William Cutter, and Mathew Hotopf. 2008. Assessing mental capacity: The mental capacity act. BMJ 336 (7639): 322–325.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Sessums, Laura L., Hanna Zembrzuska, and Jeffrey L. Jackson. 2011. Does this patient have medical decision-making capacity? JAMA 306: 421–427.CrossRef Sessums, Laura L., Hanna Zembrzuska, and Jeffrey L. Jackson. 2011. Does this patient have medical decision-making capacity? JAMA 306: 421–427.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Shaw, David, Manuel Trachsel, and Bernice Elger. 2018. Assessment of decision-making capacity in patients requesting assisted suicide. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 213 (1): 393–395.CrossRef Shaw, David, Manuel Trachsel, and Bernice Elger. 2018. Assessment of decision-making capacity in patients requesting assisted suicide. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 213 (1): 393–395.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (SAMS). 2019. Assessment of capacity in medical practice. Medical-ethical guidelines. Bern: SAMS. Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (SAMS). 2019. Assessment of capacity in medical practice. Medical-ethical guidelines. Bern: SAMS.
Zurück zum Zitat Sturman, Edward D. 2005. The capacity to consent to treatment and research: A review of standardized assessment tools. Clinical Psychology Review. 25: 954–974.CrossRef Sturman, Edward D. 2005. The capacity to consent to treatment and research: A review of standardized assessment tools. Clinical Psychology Review. 25: 954–974.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Decision-making capacity: from testing to evaluation
verfasst von
Helena Hermann
Martin Feuz
Manuel Trachsel
Nikola Biller-Andorno
Publikationsdatum
29.04.2020
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy / Ausgabe 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1386-7423
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-8633
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-019-09930-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2020

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 2/2020 Zur Ausgabe