PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1960366

Artificial feeding: the least restrictive alternative?

Abstract

Of all the reasons that justify a decision to withhold or withdraw a feeding tube, the most basic is that it is not needed in order to nourish the patient adequately and safely. The controversy that surrounds feeding tubes decisions in the so-called right-to-die context has distracted attention from this aspect of their use. This creates the risk that they will be initiated inappropriately, without adequate evaluation or consent. By re-incorporating the concepts of medical indication and the least restrictive alternative doctrine into the consent process, as new federal regulations require, physicians can restore balance to clinical judgment and deter improper practices. In order for these concepts to make a real difference to patients and physicians, society must improve the quality of care it provides the elderly.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G R Scofield. 1991. Artificial feeding: the least restrictive alternative?. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb03577.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Guidelines for guidelines.

Practice guidelines are proliferating in medicine. In addition to methodological problems that cause guidelines to be outdated rapidly, they are plagued by conflicts of interest. They are largely consensus opinions of panels of experts, most of whom are supported by industry. Professional societies, health insurers, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and dialysis providers also benefit from guidelines. Little attention is paid to the potential for harm to patients, and to the profession of medicine, from the widespread use of guidelines.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.↗