Physicians have an obligation to consider a patient’s quality of life when making treatment decisions and should consider giving patients the options of withholding or withdrawing aggressive treatment if that treatment will not restore the kind of life the patient finds meaningful.
Appropriate use of the pay-for-performance system may improve quality of care by counteracting physician incentives to overtreat in fee-for-service situations or undertreat in capitation plans.
A philosophical analysis of how physician actions and treatment goals are defined and interpreted and how understanding this process can affect the success of the clinical encounter.
To be a useful tool for assessing quality of physician care, pay-for-performance must be designed to include process measures and to not penalize physicians for treating patients with difficult-to-manage conditions.
Dr Katie Savin joins Ethics Talk to discuss their article, coauthored with Drs Laura Guidry-Grimes and Olivia S. Kates: “What Does Disability Justice Require of Antimicrobial Stewardship?”
Sterling Johnson joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Dr Kimberly L. Sue: "Drawing on Black and Queer Communities’ Harm Reduction Histories to Improve Overdose Prevention Strategies and Policies.”
Dr Oluwole Jegede joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Drs Julio C. Nunes, Terence Tumenta, Carmen Black, and Joao P. DeAquino: “What Would Equitable Harm Reduction Look Like?”
Dr Elizabeth Salisbury-Afshar joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Drs Catherine J. Livingston and Ricky N. Bluthenthal: “How Should Harm Reduction Be Included in Care Continua for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder?”