Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
The article by Kamm identifies ‘potential pitfalls’ in current approaches to providing patient-centred advanced illness and end-of-life care (EOLC). Specifically, Kamm cautions against ‘nudging and framing effects’ in discussions to elicit patients' preferences that could produce ‘skewed or biased results’. Kamm further argues that precision and neutrality in questions designed to elicit patient preferences may help to ensure that preferences are ‘reliably elicited’ and avoid mistakes in EOLC decisions. In response, we highlight the problems with a focus on precision and neutrality in discussions about end-of-life (EOL) preferences and advocate an alternative approach that we believe is more likely to achieve patient-centred care.
The problems with precision and neutrality
Kamm describes eliciting patients' values via precise and balanced trade-off questions, with increasingly specific follow-up questions used to pinpoint patients' wishes and ‘avoid mistakes in EOLC decisions’. This approach does not resonate with our experience conducting EOL conversations with seriously ill patients and, we would argue, it risks biasing preference elicitation for different reasons.
First, Kamm's model assumes that people have preformed preferences for EOL treatments. She suggests that the goal of the interview is to elicit these preformed preferences in a way that lets the ‘truth’ come out. In contrast, we argue that preferences are discovered in conversation, a process in which patients reflect on …
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Advanced and end of life care: cautionary suggestions
- Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk
- ‘I'll continue as long as I can, and die when I can't help it’: a qualitative exploration of the views of end-of-life care by those affected by head and neck cancer (HNC)
- Advance care planning evaluation: a scoping review of best research practice
- Role of patients’ family members in end-of-life communication: an integrative review
- Making patient values visible in healthcare: a systematic review of tools to assess patient treatment priorities and preferences in the context of multimorbidity
- Knowledge, attitudes and preferences of palliative and end-of-life care among patients with cancer in mainland China: a cross-sectional study
- Decision-making in palliative care: patient and family caregiver concordance and discordance—systematic review and narrative synthesis
- Physicians’ political preferences and the delivery of end of life care in the United States: retrospective observational study
- End-of-life care for older first-generation migrants: a scoping review