RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study assesses physicians' attitudes on the importance of working with colleagues who share the same ethical or moral outlook regarding morally controversial healthcare practices and examines the association of physicians' religious and spiritual characteristics with these attitudes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary data analysis of a 2009 national survey that was administered to a stratified random sample of 1504 US primary care physicians (PCPs). In that dataset, physicians were asked: "For you personally, how important is it to work with colleagues who share your ethical/moral outlook regarding morally controversial health care practices?" We examined associations between physicians' religious/spiritual characteristics and their attitudes toward having a shared ethical/moral outlook with colleagues. RESULTS: Among eligible respondents, the response rate was 63% (896/1427). Overall, 69% of PCPs indicated that working with colleagues who share their ethical/moral outlook regarding morally controversial healthcare practices was either very important (23%) or somewhat important (46%). Physicians who were more religious were more likely than nonreligious physicians to report that a shared ethical/moral outlook was somewhat/very important to them (P < 0.001 for all measures of religiosity, including religious affiliation, attendance at religious services, intrinsic religiosity, and importance of religion as well as spirituality). Physicians with a high sense of calling were more likely than those with a low sense of calling to report a high importance of having a shared ethical/moral outlook with colleagues regarding morally controversial healthcare practices (multivariate odds ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.5-4.1). CONCLUSIONS: In this national study of PCPs, physicians who identified as religious, spiritual, or having a high sense of calling were found to place a stronger emphasis on the importance of shared ethical/moral outlook with work colleagues regarding morally controversial healthcare practices. Moral controversy in health care may pose a particular challenge for physicians with lower commitments to theological pluralism.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Ética Médica , Principios Morales , Relaciones Médico-Paciente/ética , Médicos de Atención Primaria/ética , Religión y Medicina , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Espiritualidad , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether physician spirituality, religion, and sense of calling toward medicine are predictors of self-reported empathic compassion. METHODS: We sampled 2000 practicing US physicians from all specialties and used self-reported measures of general and clinical empathic compassion taken from previous studies. Independent variables were single-item measures of calling, spirituality, and religiosity (importance of religion). RESULTS: The survey response rate was 64.5% (1289/2000). Physicians with a strong sense of calling were more likely to report higher general empathic compassion (odds ratio [OR] 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-3.15) and higher clinical empathic compassion (OR 3.33, 95% CI 2.07-5.36). Similarly, physicians who considered themselves spiritual were more likely to report higher general empathic compassion (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.69-4.50) and higher clinical empathic compassion (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.38-3.90). We did not find an association between religiosity and measures of physicians' empathic compassion. CONCLUSIONS: This national study of practicing US physicians from various specialties found that spirituality (not religiousness) and the identification of medicine as a calling are associated with physicians' empathic compassion. Further study is needed to understand how spirituality and calling are linked to prosocial behaviors among physicians that may be enhancing their clinical empathy and promoting compassionate patient care.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Selección de Profesión , Empatía , Médicos/psicología , Religión y Medicina , Espiritualidad , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Non-adherence is a major obstacle with long-term daily statin therapy. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of patients with hyperlipidemia during an 8-year period in a private internal medicine practice. Periodic dosing was negotiated following several patients' refusal of statin therapy because of muscle aches or cost. METHODS: The clinical impetus was patient adherence to statin therapy. Treatment was initiated by dispensing rosuvastatin or atorvastatin in a stepwise patient-directed approach (from two times/week to three times/week to every other day, up to five times/week). The primary endpoint was to assess the concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and the total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TC/HDL-C) ratio with patient-directed dosing intervals. The secondary endpoint was a head-to-head comparison of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin to evaluate the mean decrease in the LDL-C and TC/HDL-C ratio. RESULTS: Chart review identified 46 patients who had been treated. Two patients with persistent myalgia terminated treatment before 12 weeks. Among the remaining 44 patients, 20 received doses of rosuvastatin from 15 to 100 mg per week, and 24 received atorvastatin from 20 to 140 mg per week. There was a significant decrease from pre-treatment in the mean TC/HDL-C ratio of 1.72 (31.1%, P < 0.0001) and mean LDL-C of 43.3 mg/dL (30.2%, P < 0.0001). An independent samples t-test showed a non-significant reduction of the mean TC/HDL-C ratio and LDL-C with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin. CONCLUSION: Periodic dosing of rosuvastatin or atorvastatin using a gradual, patient-directed, stepwise approach guided by cholesterol levels is an effective method of lipid lowering and carried a favorable 95.6% adherence rate.