You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


Advertisement

ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | RSS | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 145 No. 8, August 1985 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Online Only
 •  Online First Table of
Contents
  CLINICAL ETHICS
 •Online Features
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (8)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Delicious Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Dying Right in Theory and Practice

What Do We Really Know of Terminal Care?

Henry S. Perkins, MD; Albert R. Jonsen, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 1985;145(8):1460-1463.


Abstract



• Despite the widely held belief that hospices treat dying patients differently than conventional hospitals do, few systematic comparisons exist. We reviewed medical charts to study the terminal care practice at one hospital and two inpatient hospices. As expected, hospital patients had more diagnostic tests and higher laboratory charges than patients in either hospice did. Yet physicians' notes about patients' families or nonmedical aspects of illness were infrequent at all three institutions. Furthermore, analgesic use and the frequency of nurses' notes about nonmedical or family issues differed between hospices: sometimes one hospice, sometimes the other, resembled the hospital closely. Hence, some common assumptions about hospice care appear inaccurate. We believe that health professionals who attend dying patients—whether in hospitals or hospices—have an obligation to examine their terminal care practices critically and to develop standards appropriate for their institutions.

(Arch Intern Med 1985;145:1460-1463)



Author Affiliations



From the Division of General Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio (Dr Perkins); and the Institute for Health Policy Studies and the Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Jonsen).


Footnotes



Accepted for publication Aug 21,1984.

Read before the national meeting of the American Federation for Clinical Research, Washington, DC, May 6, 1984.

The authors' opinions, conclusions, and proposals do not necessarily represent the views of the Johnson or Picker Foundations or the Coburn Trust.

Reprint requests to Division of General Medicine, Brady-Green, 527 N Leona, San Antonio, TX 78207 (Dr Perkins).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | PHYSICIAN JOBS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1985 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.