Artificial nutrition and hydration in Catholic healthcare: balancing tradition, recent teaching, and law.

Roman Catholics have a long tradition of evaluating medical treatment at the end of life to determine if proposed interventions are proportionate and morally obligatory or disproportionate and morally optional. There has been significant debate within the Catholic community about whether artificially delivered nutrition and hydration can be appreciated as a medical intervention that may be optional in some situations, or if it should be treated as essentially obligatory in all circumstances. Recent statements from the teaching authority of the church have attempted to clarify this issue, especially for those with a condition known as the persistent vegetative state. I argue that these recent teachings constitute a "general norm" whereby artificial nutrition and hydration are considered obligatory for most patients, but that these documents allow for exception in cases of complication from the means used to deliver nutrition and hydration, progressive illness, or clear refusal of such treatment by patients. While the recent clarifications do not constitute a major deviation from traditional understanding and will rarely conflict with advance directives or legal statutes, there may be rare instances in which remaining faithful to church teaching may conflict with legally enshrined patient prerogatives. Using the Texas Advance Directives Act as an example, I propose ways in which ethics committees can remain faithful to their Roman Catholic identity while respecting patient autonomy and state law pertaining to end of life health care.

Medical error, malpractice and complications: a moral geography.

This essay reviews and defines avoidable medical error, malpractice and complication. The relevant ethical principles pertaining to unanticipated medical outcomes are identified. In light of these principles I critically review the moral culpability of the agents in each circumstance and the resulting obligations to patients, their families, and the health care system in general. While I touch on some legal implications, a full discussion of legal obligations and liability issues is beyond the scope of this paper.

A randomized controlled trial of angiography versus intravascular ultrasound-directed bare-metal coronary stent placement (the AVID Trial).

BACKGROUND: AVID (Angiography Versus Intravascular ultrasound-Directed stent placement) is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial designed to assess the effect of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-directed stent placement on the 12-month rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR). METHODS AND RESULTS: After elective coronary stent placement and an optimal angiographic result (<10% stenosis), 800 patients were randomized to Angiography- or IVUS-directed therapy. Blinded IVUS was performed in the Angiography group without further therapy. In the IVUS group, IVUS criteria for optimal stent placement (<10% area stenosis, apposition, and absence of dissection) were applied. Final minimum stent area was 6.90+/-2.43 mm(2) in the Angiography group and 7.55+/-2.82 mm(2) in the IVUS group (P=0.001). In the IVUS group, only 37% with inadequate expansion (<90%) received further therapy. The 12-month TLR rate was 12.0% in the Angiography group and 8.1% in the IVUS group (P=0.08, 95% confidence level [CI], [-8.3% to 0.5%]). When vessels with a distal reference diameter <2.5 mm by core laboratory angiography measurement were excluded from analysis, the 12-month TLR rate was 10.1% in the Angiography group and 4.3% in the IVUS group (P=0.01, 95% CI, [-10.6% to -1.2%]). With a pre-stent angiographic stenosis of > or =70%, the TLR rate was lower in the IVUS group compared with the Angiography group (3.1% versus 14.2%; P=0.002; 95% CI, [-18.4% to -4.2%]). CONCLUSIONS: IVUS-directed bare-metal stent placement results in larger acute stent dimensions without an increase in complications and a significantly lower 12-month TLR rate for vessels > or =2.5 mm by angiography and for vessels with high-grade pre-stent stenosis. However, for the entire sample analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis, IVUS-directed bare-metal stent placement does not significantly reduce the 12-month TLR rate when compared with stent placement guided by angiography alone. In addition, IVUS evaluation of adequate stent expansion is underutilized by experienced operators.

The impact of Roman Catholic moral theology on end-of-life care under the Texas Advance Directives Act.

This essay reviews the Roman Catholic moral tradition surrounding treatments at the end of life together with the challenges presented to that tradition by the Texas Advance Directives Act. The impact on Catholic health care facilities and physicians, and the way in which the moral tradition should be applied under this statute, particularly with reference to the provision dealing with conflicts over end-of-life treatments, will be critically assessed. I will argue, based on the traditional treatment of end-of-life issues, that Catholic physicians and institutions should appeal to the conflict resolution process of the Advance Directives Act only under a limited number of circumstances. The implications, under the Texas statute, of varied interpretations of Pope John Paul II's recent allocution on artificial feeding and hydration in the persistent vegetative state will also be considered.