陳榮基TAIWAN

我的相片
Taiwan
姓名陳榮基現任恩主公醫院教授/顧問醫師 神經學兼任教授. 曾任(台灣大學/台北醫學大學)教授, 醫院評鑑暨醫療品質策進會顧問,台灣失智症協會名譽理事長,台灣腦中風醫學會名譽理事長,中華慧炬佛學會理事長,佛教蓮花基金會董事長,健康世界雜誌社社長.慧炬雜誌社發行人, 佛教僧伽醫護基金會董事,華梵大學董事. [曾任]恩主公醫院創院院長,台大醫院副院長,台大醫學院/附設醫院神經科教授及主任,台大醫學院生理學科教授.台灣神經學學會理事長,台灣安寧照顧協會理事長,消費者文教基金會理事/監事長,佛教醫事人員聯合會理事長,台灣神經學學會雜誌(Acta Neurologica Taiwanica)創刊總編輯. [學歷] 台大醫學院醫科畢業,黎巴嫩貝魯特美國大學(American Univ of Beirut)進修(WHO復健醫學訓練班),美國威斯康辛大學(Univ of Wisconsin-Madison)神經科進修, 日本福岡九州大學腦神經研究所進修. [獎項]醫師醫療奉獻獎(台灣醫師公會全國聯合會,2007/11/12),越南衛生部人民健康奉獻獎(2010/10/11)Received a Medal for People's Heath from the Ministry of Health of Vietnam on Oct. 11, 2010. 周大觀文教基金會全球熱愛生命獎章.(2011/04/16).2021年總統文化獎.

2009年12月31日 星期四

*新書推薦:<醫學人文概論>



第七章
臨終關懷的人文精神
陳榮基
台大醫學院神經科教授
前言
醫學的目的是預防疾病、治好疾病及解除痛苦,恢復健康。醫生的天職當然是把病人救活,把疾病消滅,將痛苦解除,促進人類的健康。但是「生、老、病、死」是生命的必經過程,當生命已走到盡頭,死亡已是不可避免時,醫療從業人員,包括醫師、護理人員及所有的醫事人員,是否更應該以最大的愛心及人性的關懷,來提供給每一個病人沒有痛苦,能夠安詳有尊嚴的往生的機會?醫生要『救生』,也要『救死』,醫師照顧病人,應該是「從子宮到墳墓」(“From womb to tomb”),從出生到死亡,而最後階段的臨終關懷,更應發揮「拔苦予樂」的宗教情操與人文精神。
(全文請看09/12/05本部落格)

*醫療過失判斷的困境

醫療過失判斷的困境
作者:吳俊穎/台中榮民總醫院胃腸科主治醫師、東海大學法律系副教授、
   賴惠蓁/國家衛生研究院群體健康科學研究所衛生政策研究組研究助理、
   陳榮基/恩主公醫院教授顧問醫師、醫院評鑑暨醫療品質策進會顧問
    /出處:法學新論第17期:57-73頁,2009(12)
Journal of New Perspectives on Law 2009; 17:57-73.
摘要:醫療糾紛日益增多,進入法庭訴訟的比例,由一九九一年的百分之十五‧七增加到二○○五年的百分之二十三,然而病患的勝訴率則一向偏低。病患勝訴率過低的原因,除了許多自認有過失的醫師選擇庭外和解,也與過去台灣醫療糾紛多採取刑事訴訟有關。此外,對於複雜的醫療行為,要確認注意義務的違反以及因果關係的存在,有相當的困難度。本文將藉由實際個案來探討醫療刑事過失的構成要件:包括注意義務的違反、客觀上的可預見性及可預防性、醫療傷害的發生以及因果關係是否存在的判斷。醫療過失判斷的諸多困境將在本文中詳細討論。...

2009年12月27日 星期日

*推薦洪啟嵩禪師新書—<菩薩商主與卓越企業家>



推薦洪啟嵩禪師新書—<菩薩商主與卓越企業家>
陳榮基
   00八年發生的兩件大事:三鹿毒奶粉事件及全球金融大海嘯,見證了唯利是圖,沒有愛心,沒有慈悲心的企業家,所可能引起的全球百姓受害的恐怖有多深與多遠!宇宙禪師洪啟嵩老師乃引證<<商主天子所問經>>,<<大方廣佛華嚴經>><<金剛經>>等佛經,闡釋現代企業家應有的胸懷與抱負,寫成<<菩薩商主與卓越企業家>>一書(台北:全佛文化公司,200911月初版),既可為企業經營的指南,也可作力行六度波羅蜜的導引。
   本書告訴我們,佛經裡不但有「商主」,甚至有「商主如來」。商主帶領商隊出外經商,不但要照顧商隊的生活所需,帶領大家取得財寶,當大家遇到誘惑時,還要保護他們不致陷入險境。佛經終甚至將菩薩的修行,比喻如同大商主乘大船到海中尋寶的過程。因此商人或企業家,也可將經商與經營企業,作為修行的道路。企業家應將商主菩薩的概念,落實在企業的永續經營,成為新時代企業家的典範。「菩薩經濟學」是以慈悲和智慧為核心,我們應以此重新思考人類的未來。
   洪老師說:「企業即佈施,利潤即福報,輾轉善循環,共成淨世間。」企業的佈施對象有三:產品或服務的使用者,企業的員工與眷屬,企業主自身及其家人。負起對社會的責任,應是企業的最大佈施。企業家應「以智慧創造利潤,以慈悲善待一切」。
   洪老師提出六種「佛教的環保觀」:因果的環保觀,精神與物質的環保觀,三世的環保觀,無我的環保觀,無常的環保觀,宇宙一合相的環保觀。並勉勵偉大的企業家應具備「企業五力」:願景力,慈悲力,智慧力,創造力,執行力。企業家應以最小的投入,創造眾生的最大幸福。「以無相佈施的心從事自利利他的經濟運作。希望眾生在成佛的生涯中,沒有任何匱乏,能安心於道命,而淨土能圓滿莊嚴,無量光明。」

2009年12月26日 星期六

*懺公墨寶


*蓮花基金會张寶方董事榮獲好人好事八德獎


受獎代表感言

張寶方

曾次長、黃處長、何董事長、各位受獎代表、黃主持人、各位嘉賓大家好:

我是寶方,誠惶誠恐代表所有受獎者向評審、主辦單位及所有參與的志工朋友們說聲:「謝謝」!謝謝各位長期的堅持及辛勞付出,才有今日場景在這聚會接受表揚。

個人從醫療諮詢到安寧療護到蓮花基金會,參與臨終關懷、推動生命教育,經歷天災人禍、看盡生離死別,到參與協助救人工作,也因「做中學」「學中挫」讓我不斷成長。在台中榮總推動太平間人性化硬體改造,十八年來不斷自問:「這一生為何而來?為誰而做?」原來做的過程中未被挫折影響而退縮,那是因為「在別人的需要上,我看見自己的責任」。身為中華民國的一份子,上至元首下至庶民,這土地是我們的根,必需有更多的愛灌溉、更多的智慧淨化、給予滋養。

好人好事與安寧療護都是社會運動,淨化心靈成長,提昇人的品質之方向。今天所有受獎者來自社會各界,分散在不同的地方,盡社會公民應盡之責任。當然,我們也從付出服務的對象中獲取教育及學習,在別人的苦難中,我們感受那份痛!感恩你們的示現!謝謝!

今天這份殊譽,不是生命中的匾額,而是期勉我們身體力行、再接再勵!實踐公益之愛、社會之善。在此拋磚引玉、引領人心,畢竟一己之力很有限,要做的事很多,所以我們需要更多好人好事共同參與。最近跟隨法鼓山基金會到六龜、小林村,看見無數公益團體、志工默默付出,默默為家鄉盡心。生活好的人可幫生活較不好的人,生活不好的人不要氣餒,因為這社會自然有愛有溫暖,「您」並不孤單。

我常比喻自己像黑貓宅急便、7-11,因為行善是在他/她需要的時候即時付出,等到時間點錯過,我們有再多想給,他們也不需要了。所以我要向兩位寶貝─我的女兒說聲抱歉,常讓妳們在公車站牌等媽媽,對不起!也要謝謝妳們陪媽媽做公益,那感覺真的很好很好!謝謝!

謝謝所有支持受獎人的家人、朋友、公益團體朋友們,當然我要謝謝所有教我育我的師長們,蓮花基金會陳榮基董事長、中榮志工隊、山海營伙伴們,謝謝你們的陪伴,也要感謝台北氧氣公司林董事及夫人的推薦,這獎是大家共同努力的肯定。藉此以內心的話與所有受獎人互勉,追尋平凡中的燦爛,體會「為人服務的快樂」,心靈充沛不在你擁有多少權力、財富,而是「堅持」做對的事,並勇往直前。當我受挫時,安寧之母趙可式博士用一句話鼓勵我:「參透為何,方能迎接任何」!最後祝福大家,好人好事需要您也少不了您。讓我們一起努力,謝謝!



2009年12月24日 星期四

2009年12月22日 星期二

*台北市立仁愛醫院仁鶴軒開幕




台灣失智症協會瑞智學堂第一個加盟店--台北市立仁愛醫院仁鶴軒開幕!

2009年12月18日 星期五

2009年12月16日 星期三

*向左走、向右走?CPR or DNR?



向左走、向右走?CPR or DNR?
黃勝堅/台大醫院外科部醫師 







阿枝阿媽受糖尿病所苦已經5年多,也一直不願意鋸掉自己的一條腿,她常說:「我寧願死也不要少一條腿」,家人雖然擔心阿媽病情的惡化,但也尊重她對生命品質的堅持。然而隨阿媽病情越來越嚴重,當醫師與家屬試著與阿媽談簽署DNR(不施行心肺復甦術)時,阿枝阿媽卻堅決插管,這樣的抉擇與醫生預期的答案完全不同,也跟她堅持保留一條腿的決定,有那麼些許的矛盾。但在進一步的旁敲側擊下才了解,阿枝阿媽對年輕時,來不及見到母親最後一面,一直耿耿於懷;現在自己即將面對死亡,可是孩子們都還在國外,所以她希望自己的孩子日後不要經歷她所受的苦與遺憾,才下了插管的決定,讓孩子們能見到她最後一面。(引述陳榮基教授小故事)
即將面對死亡的人,心理所牽掛的不是死亡的來到,而是活著的人是否能好好的活下去,讓我想起陽明附醫陳秀丹醫師的一句話:「死亡深層的意涵是讓活著的人活得更好」,讓身為醫療團隊的我們,了解死亡照顧過程中,不能忽略的還包含了家屬。
面對疾病的十字路口,決定的人是那樣的徬徨、恐懼與擔憂。家人間如果事前沒有過充分的溝通,往往不清楚病人的意願為何?只能主觀的猜測,同時家屬又何嘗不是萬般的不捨,深怕任何一個決定,帶來無法承受的後果。身為醫療人員,每天有如此多的生命與自己擦身而過,愈形發現預立醫囑的重要性,讓家人了解我們對自己醫療上的決定,是讓生死兩相安的關鍵。當然在台灣的文化氛圍下,DNRDo Not Resuscitate是個難以開口的禁忌話題,只是「不談」只增添了病人及家屬間意願的漸行漸遠。
站在醫療的角度,簽了DNR不是出了事什麼都不做,DNR只是善終的起點,只是讓家人有預先的共識,只是使病人的自主獲得尊重。站在一位醫師的角度,DNR不是「放棄」,只是有所為、有所不為,就如同台大邱泰源教授說的:我們會盡力「拼」,有機會時「拼」救命,沒有機會就「拼」尊嚴、「拼」善終。醫療技術越來越進步的今日,醫師、病人及家屬反而越來越不能接受醫療是有極限的事實,「接受生命的極限」與「放棄」是不同的,我們需學會分辨這兩者間的差別。想像一個有漏洞的容器,不斷的加水,是永遠無法填滿的,所以面對重大的醫療決定時,應該思考:您的決定到底是延長死亡的過程,還是生命本身呢?或許答案就會更加清楚了。
(本文轉載自安寧電子報 http://www.hospice.org.tw/2009/chinese/epaper-list.php )(承作者及安寧照顧基金會同意) 
* 本網站 之課程內容、講義、文章之版權所有, 請尊重作者智慧財產權;若需使用須經作者及本會授權同意,並請註明出處及原作者。



2009年12月14日 星期一

2009年12月13日 星期日

NATMA and Taiwan Medical History


This article about the origin of the Taiwan medical history is written by Prof. J.Y. Albert Chu, M.D. 
You can click at each page to enlarge the words to become readable.


2009年12月11日 星期五

2009年12月7日 星期一

2009年12月5日 星期六

*The Spirit of Humanism in Terminal Care—Taiwan Experience

The Open Area Studies Journal, 2009, 2,7-11

The Spirit of Humanism in Terminal Care—Taiwan Experience
*Rong-Chi Chen, M.D.
*Department of Neurology, En Chu Kong Hospital, 399 Fuhsing Road, San Hsia Town, Taipei County 23702, TAIWAN

Key words: Terminal care, hospice, palliative care, CPR, DNR, resuscitation, humanity
Address: E-mail address: rongchichen@gmail.com
TEL: +886-2-2351-2796
FAX: +886-2-2357-0253
Running title: Humanism in terminal care
Abstract: The purpose of medicine is to prevent illness, to cure disease, to relieve suffering and to maintain health. The duty of the physicians, of course, is to rescue life, to cure disease, to relieve suffering and to promote health. However, “birth, aging, sickness and death” are unavoidable path of human life. When a person has reached the end of his life, when death is impending, the duty of medical professionals will be to provide love and humanistic care for the patient, to relieve pain and suffering and provide a peaceful and dignified demise. Hospice palliative care is a holistic and humanistic care for terminal patients by providing physical, psychosocial and spiritual wellbeing of the patients and their families. This paper reviews the history of development of hospice palliative care in Taiwan. We have made innovative development of promoting registration of do-no-resuscitation (DNR) living will in the IC card of the national health insurance system and training of Buddhist monastics as chaplains.

INTRODUCTION
     The purpose of medicine is to prevent illness, to cure disease, to relieve suffering and to maintain health. However, “birth, senescence, illness and death” are unavoidable path of human life. When a person has reached the end of his life, when death is impending, the duty of medical professionals is to provide love and tender care for the patient, to relieve pain and suffering and to provide a peaceful and dignified demise. This is the humanism in medicine, in contrast to the purely “scientific and heroic fighting” of saving life to the last minute. The caring domain of a physician is from birth to death, from “womb to tomb”. At the end of terminal care, physicians should maintain a religious and holistic spirit of  “removal of suffering and provision of happiness” to their patients, as much as he could. The present paper intends to report the experience of the development of the humanistic terminal care movement in Taiwan. Hospice palliative care is a holistic and humanistic care for terminal patients by providing physical, psychosocial and spiritual wellbeing of the patients and their families. This paper reviews the history of development of hospice palliative care in Taiwan. We have made innovative development of promoting registration of do-no-resuscitation (DNR) living will in the IC card of the national health insurance system and training of Buddhist monastics as chaplains.


THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOSPICE PALLIATIVE MEDICINE [1-7]
     In the Sanskrit of ancient Indian Buddhist sutras, “Vihara” was used to name the place for training or residing of monks and nuns. In the Catholic tradition, “Hospice” was used to name a cloister or rest station for pilgrim persons since the 5th Century. It was also extended for a place of housing for the injured, the sick and the dying persons. In 1967, Dr. Dame Cicely Saunders founded the St. Christopher’s Hospice in London, incorporating “hospice” into a modern medical facility for the care of cancer and other terminal patients.[1] Since then, the “hospice movement” has spread to Europian, American and Asian countries. It reached Japan in 1973. Some of the hospice facilities of Buddhist hospitals in Japan are called “vihara”.[5]
In 1990 the first “hospice ward”[3] was introduced into Taiwan in the Christian Mackay Hospital by Dr. Chang-Hong Chung. In 1995 I opened a “palliative care ward” in the National Taiwan University Hospital. Gradually, many organizations have joined into this hospice-palliative care movement, namely the (Christian) Taiwan Hospice Foundation (founded in 1990), the Catholic Sanipax Medical Education Foundation (1993), the Buddhist Lotus Hospice Care Foundation (1994), the Taiwan Hospice Organization (1995), the Taiwan Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine (1999), the Taiwan Nurse’s Hospice Association (2005), and the Taiwan Assoication of Clinical Buddhism Study (2007). The Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Bureau of the National Health Insurance (BNHI) also gave official support to the movement. We are observing a prosperous development of hospice palliative care in Taiwan.[2-7]
Palliative care or palliative medicine was used for the medical care aiming at relieving suffering instead of curing of the diseases. The word “palliate” originates for the Latin “palliatus ” or “palliare”, meaning to mitigate, to reduce the severity of, to relieve. It was used in the 16th Century in medicine for the relief or reduction of pain and suffering.
In 1990 the World Health Organization (WHO) published guidelines for the palliative care as: ” This is the active total care offered to patients with a progressive illness and their families when it is recognized that the illness is no longer curable, in order to concentrate on the quality of life and the alleviation of distressing symptoms within the framework of coordinated service. It provides relief from pain and other distressing symptoms, integrating the psychological and spiritual aspects of care. Palliative care neither hastens nor postpones death. Its goal is to achieve the best quality of life for both patients and their families.”[8]
In 2002 WHO further defined the palliative care as “Palliative care is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their families facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness, through the prevention and relief of suffering by means of early identification and impeccable treatment of pain and other problems, physical, psychosocial and spiritual.”[9]
In palliative care, the quality of life is more important than the length of life.   Lately, it is the consensus of people working in this field to put palliative care and hospice care together as “hospice palliative care”.
  
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN SCIENCE AND HUMANITY
“Up until recent times, most people died at home, peacefully and in the company of family. Due to the advancement of medical science, however, many people now expire at a hospital. Since the invention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the 1960s and the subsequent relentless advance of medical technology, our life span may have increased, however, it appears reasonable to suggest that the quality of life at its end may not have improved. Instead, healthcare providers, in particular physicians, now fight for lives against all the odds, promoting the false belief in the omnipotence of medical care and the triumph of man over nature. As a result of this "heroic fight" by physicians, more and more people now die a painful death in the hospital. Physicians often cannot accept the defeat of losing a patient, while relatives are unwilling to let their family member go or believe they are disloyal or unloving if they do not let the physician attempt a last CPR.”[10]
“Cancer has become the leading cause of death in the developed countries, including Taiwan. When cancer enters the terminal stage, and the physician has exhausted all treatment options and knows that the patient cannot be saved, the individual will often be left to his own devices and will have no choice but to bear the torment and suffering of terminal cancer. When the patient is near the end of life, however, the position becomes diametrically opposed and CPR is applied, with the patient, who is already at the psychological and physical limits of suffering, subjected to yet more anguish, and often consigned to a bitter death.”[10]
With the advance of modern science and technology and the change of social environment, many people now a days, died in the hospitals or nursing homes. The ever changing of new techniques in CPR makes the physicians more determined to fight against the death-call and to rescue lives to the last minute. Medical education usually neglected the teaching of how to face the terminal patients gracefully. In the emergency services, medical or surgical wards or intensive care units, when a terminal patient lost his ability to breath, CPR will mostly be applied. Physicians believe that to rescue life is their royal duty, and can not accept to lose the patient without exerting the last effort of CPR. The patient’s family can not let go their beloved. They felt that letting their relative to die without allowing physician to make the last effort is unfilial or unloving.
Is it necessary for physicians to apply the terminal CPR to these patients, knowing that it is a futile effort?[11-13]As a matter of fact, at the end of many terminal diseases, CPR is a non-effective attempt. Many studies agreed that in the following situations, CPR is a futile treatment and should not be applied: i.e. the terminal cancer patients, patients with multiple organ failure or vital organ failure,  such as terminal hepatic failure, heart failure, lung failure, renal failure and brain failure (severe dementia), AIDS or motor neuron disease.[14-17]
The principles of medical ethics include “ beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy and justice.” Since we know that at the end of terminal failure, medical evidence already agreed that CPR is no more “beneficent” and even is definitely “maleficent” in giving more pain, why we can not obey patient’s “autonomy” of wishing “do-no-resuscitation, DNR”?  By obeying patient’s DNR order (autonomy), we will not hurt the patient again by applying CPR (nonmaleficence), we can also help to offer patient a peaceful dying (beneficence). If a terminal patient is given endotracheal tube and mechanical ventilator as part of the CPR effort and sent to the intensive care unit to stay for a few hours or days before death, it is a waste of medical resource and preventing the chance of other patients who are in need of the ICU beds. Isn’t it “unjustice” to the latter?[16-17]
In Taiwan, the Law of Medical Care stipulates in the Item 60: “A hospital or clinic should use all its ability and facility to rescue life of any critical patient.” The Item 21 of the Law of Physicians requires “A physician should use all of his ability to rescue the life of any person in critical condition.” There was a physician subjected to law suit because of obeying the DNR wish of a terminal cancer patient. The Ministry  of Health gave a Statement of Number #786849 in 1989 refusing the request of patient or family member’s DNR wish. The family member often asked for CPR out of the loving and filial heart. The physician was afraid of facing legal dispute if he obeyed the DNR order of the patient. Some physician also felt that he was obliged to do the CPR out of his “royal duty” and “loving heart” of saving life. Thus, many patients who died in a hospital continued to suffer from the futile, painful and meaningless terminal and futile CPR,[10,14-17] because CPR is a default practice in dying patients.[18-19]

THE HOSPICE PALLIATIVE CARE ACT
A “Natural Death Act” was passed in 1976 in California, promoting the concept of “living will”. This law gives the right to US citizen while he was in healthy condition, to make choice of receiving CPR or not (i.e. DNR) at the end of life. In hospice palliative care, DNR is an important practice to ensure a peaceful dying. However, it is not concordant with the social practice and also was not completely legal in Taiwan as stated in the last paragraph. In order to make this practice lawful, to respect the fundamental human right of peaceful death,  the hospice team started to lobby for the passing of a Natural Death Act in Taiwan. On May 23, 2000 a “Hospice Palliatvie Care Act” was finally passed. It was the first in the world to put “Hospice palliative care” into the name of a legal act. The Act gives definition of the “Hospice palliative care” as “palliative or supportive care for decreasing or relieving pain and suffering of the terminal patients.” The Act gives a citizen the right to choose DNR at the final stage of life when he is suffering from an incurable terminal illness. DNR is an important measure in the hospice palliative care. The Act defines CPR to include: endotracheal tube (tracheostomy), mechanical ventilator, external cardiac massage, drugs used for restoration of cardiopulmonary functions, cardiac electroshock, pace maker and any other rescuing measures.  Patient can choose to reject all of the above measures or any of them, such as refusal of endotracheal tube. DNR can also be applied to many terminal patients not staying in the hospice palliative units.[11-16] In Item 7 of this Act: “For accepting do-no-resuscitation (DNR), two conditions have to be met(1). Two physicians have to agree on the diagnosis of terminal patient; (2). A signed living will of the patient asking for DNR.” If a patient is unconscious or unable to make a clear expression, a close relative can sign a permission for DNR. The priority of the relatives according to closeness is defined, for example, the spouse has the highest authority to make the decision, followed by the children, the parents, the siblings in that order.  This “Hospice Palliative Care Act” gives the right to our citizen to choose CPR or DNR at the terminal stage of his life. DNR indeed is important in providing a peaceful death in the hospice palliative care. This Act also defines a “terminal patient ” as “one suffering from severe disease or injury whose death is inevitable in a short time as determined by his attending physicians.” It is not restricted to cancer patients only. Tsai et al’s study in Taiwan [16] showed in 893 patients who died in a surgical intensive care unit, 66.7% had a DNR order signed by the family members.

PROMOTION OF DNR
Medical professionals are encouraged to teach patients and citizens the right of choosing DNR. In the United States, the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) (enacted in 1991) requested patients to be informed of their rights to participate in their medical decision making.[20] In Taiwan hospitals are urged to give the following statement to the new admission patients: “According to the Hospice Palliative Care Act, every citizen has the right to sign an advanced directive of ‘choosing hospice palliative care’ or ‘choosing DNR’ to avoid unnecessary terminal suffering.”[21-22] It is much easier to discuss this issue when a person is healthy, young or having minor disease. If a person is old or having serious illness, it is much more difficult to start the communication about the DNR issue. One can sign this living will of DNR while healthy and young. One copy of it can be handed over to the hospital to keep with the medical record. Another copy can be kept with oneself. In order to avoid keeping the DNR form in the pocket for emergency use, under the advice of the hospice team, the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI) agreed to incorporate this DNR order into the Intergrated Circuit Card (IC Card) of the BNHI. The IC Card is a small plastic card like an Indentification Card or a driver’s liscence. It contains a computer chip which can store many medical informations of the patient. Patient has to present his ID Card to clinics or hospitals when he visits a physician for medical consultation.
The hospital (or the person himself) can send this signed document to the Taiwan Hospice Organization (THO) (www.tho.org.tw). The THO will keep the formal document and send an electronic message to the MOH and BNHI to put into the medical data system of BNHI. The person can then go to a hospital or a clinic to ask for downloading this DNR order into his IC Card and also into the e-medical record of the hospital. Once this process is completed, in the future any hospital can read out this message from the IC Card. There is a column in the basic data of the IC Card which will show that the owner of this card has signed for “DNR” or signed for “organ donation”. This IC Card registration will be more convenient than the portable DNR order as proposed by Payne and Thornlow. [23]
The physician can act according to this living will order of DNR when the patient’s medical condition is terminal and CPR can offer no more benefit to the patient. The patient can then be referred to a hospice team or taken care of in the medical ward to ensure him a peaceful demise.

THE DILEMMA OF CPR OR DNR
Before the passing of this Hospice Palliative Care Act, there was a medical doctor sued for obeying his patient’s DNR request. After inauguration of this Act in 2000, there was an emergency unit physician sued because of performing CPR to a 94-year old woman with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A physician can face legal dispute in terminal patient care whether he performs CPR or not (i.e., DNR).[10,14,21,22]  
In taking care of a terminal patient with impending respiratory failure, the attending physician should act carefully with loving heart. Is he a terminal patient? Is there a DNR order signed by the patient or by the family member? Is there a DNR order document or DNR order message in the IC card? If the patient is a terminal patient and there is a DNR order, the physician should discuss with the family members with empathy to reach a consensus of helping the patient to die in peace. At this stage of dilemma, a physician should act according to ethics and to law. A loving heart with consideration of the best interest of the patient is the best guideline. In a patient with serious illness, discussion about the final DNR or CPR issue in advance is important. It will minimize the chance of medical legal disputes.
The recording of DNR order in the IC card can offer a peaceful ending of the patient and giving the patient and the family a gracious ending of a difficult life. We strongly advocate to the public: “Please do not abandon your sacred right. Prepare your good death or peaceful dying in advance by signing a DNR living will.” We also try to persuade to the medical professionals: “Do not neglect your solemn duty of helping patient a good death. Please help the patient to make DNR planning in due time and offer hospice care to the patient in need to ensure peaceful dying for each patient.”[22]

PEACEFUL DYING IS DEMANDED BY MANY RELIGIONS
     In hospice palliative care, the spiritual need and psychological care of the patients are as important as the physical care. We wish to provide physical, psychological and spiritual comfort to the patients. Sogyal Rinpoche said in his book, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, “I hope….that doctors all over the world will take extremely seriously the need to allow the dying person to die in silence and serenity. I want to appeal to the goodwill of the medical profession, and hope to inspire it to find ways to make the very difficult transition of death as easy, painless and peaceful as possible. Peaceful death is really an essential human right, more essential perhaps even than the right to vote or the right to justice; it is a right on which, all religious traditions tell us, a great deal depends for the well-being and spiritual future of the dying person. There is no greater gift of charity you can give than helping a person to die well.”[24] Christians also wish to respond to the “summon of God”, to return to the heavenly kingdom in peace, and no more suffering.
Most religions ask for “free of pain and enjoying happiness”. It is the great vow of a Bodhisattva to “relieve pain and to offer eternal happiness” to all sentient beings. The purpose of hospice palliative care, providing most humanistic care to the terminal patients is to relieve the patients from physical, psychological and spiritual pain. Of course, it is unkind to add pain to the terminal patients by performing terminal futile CPR.[17,21,22,24]

TRAINING OF BUDDHIST MONASTICS AS CHAPLAINS
   Hospice palliative care is a multidiscipline team work and a total care. The word “Hospice” originated from the Christian culture. The first organization to use the word “hospice” in modern hospital was called “St.” Christopher’s Hospice.[1] It further illustrates the importance of religious care in hospice palliative medicine. Clergymen are important members of the team for providing spiritual care. Patient’s spirituality can be enhanced by participating in religious activities, such as a Bible study, Buddhist recitation and prayer.[25,26]   In the Catholic and Christian tradition medical services were used in the religious missions. Hence, medical training was given to pastors. It is much easier to find pastors to join the hospice team. The Hospice Education Center of the Mackay Hospital provides these pastors additional training for hospice care. However, in the Buddhist history, there was no such tradition. No monks or nuns were ever trained for providing service in the hospitals. The Buddhist Lotus Hospice Care Foundation took the initiative responsibility of establishing such a training facility at the Palliative Ward of the National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) in 1998. Thanks to the organization of Professor Ching-Yu Chen, director of the NTUH Department of Family Medicine and the Venerable Shi Hui-Min, dean of the Dharma Drum Mountain College of Buddhism, the training course gradually matured. It started the first effort of training Buddhist monastics as chaplains to participate in medical care in the Buddhist history. Many trainees are currently serving in many hospice palliative units as chaplains. In 2007, the trainees joined to establish the “Taiwan Association of Clinical Buddhism Study ”. Buddhist chaplains became an important team in Taiwan’s hospice care. We are trying to promote the “clinical Buddhist monastics training program” in the curriculum of the College of Buddhism in the university systems.

GOOD TERMINAL CARE IS HUMANISTIC EXPRESSION OF MEDICAL CARE
  When a terminal patient is dying after having already suffered from so much pain in his illness, how can we treat him by giving an endotracheal tube in the process of performing CPR and keep him further suffering alone in the intensive care unit? Good death is an important human right.[22,24,27,28]What is good death?  If the following conditions can be met, a person is thought to have achieved good death:[28-31] “Knowing that death is near; accepting death peacefully; having proper arrangement of personal and interpersonal affairs; being the right time and ready to accept it; having made good bye to the loved, the relatives and the friends; reaffirmation of the past life achievement; physical condition is well taken cared of; pains and suffering symptoms are satisfactorily controlled; emotionally calm; anxiey and depressive feelings are relieved; autonomy is respected; final wishes are fulfilled; knowing that the family member’s grief will be taken cared of; nothing to hang over; nothing to worry about.”
Hospice palliative care is to provide the above mentioned care. Hospice palliative care hope to fulfill the final wishes of a terminal patient, try to offer the final journey free from pain, suffering, nor regret. As a patient, are you ready to accept the coming ending? As a medical profession, are you ready to help your patients?
In one's final moments, quality of life may be more important than the mere prolongation of existence. Physicians who respect patients' wishes and provide hospice palliative care, can foster a peaceful and dignified departure from life, although the benefits that this provides may not be easily determined empirically. Filial duty and love should find its expression in being with the family member at the end of his life, and in encouraging acceptance of disease, quiet life in his last days and peaceful passing. Where it is unavoidable, the death of a patient is not a medical failure. Not being able to facilitate a peaceful and dignified demise is, however.[10]  Being alive is the ultimate present. Ending life peacefully is the best blessing.

CONCLUSION
When a person has reached the end of his life, the duty of physicians is to give humanistic care for the patient, to relieve pain and suffering, and to provide a peaceful demise. Hospice care provides humanistic care to the terminal patients. This article reviews the development of hospice care in Taiwan. Promotion of DNR living will in advance and registering this living will in the National Health Insurance IC Card is an important measure to ensure a peaceful dying. Since Buddhists constitute about 70-80% population of Taiwan, training of monastics as chaplains to serve in the hospice is emphasized. Hospice palliative care is a holistic and humanistic care for terminal patients by providing physical, psychosocial and spiritual wellbeing of the patients and their families. We have made innovative development of promoting registration of DNR living will in the IC card of the national health insurance system and training of Buddhist monastics as chaplains. We believe that these can be used as models in further improvement of hospice care in other countries. In one's final moments, quality of life may be more important than the mere prolongation of existence.

REFERENCES
1. URL St Christopher’s Hospice http://www.stchristophers.org.uk
2. Rong-Chi Chen’s Blog http://profrcchenmd.blogspot.com
3. Lai YL, Su WH. Palliative medicine and the hospice movement in Taiwan. Support Care Cancer 1997; 5: 348-50.
4. Chen RC. To learn medicine and to learn Buddhism. Taipei: Tow of Wisdom Publ. 2002.
5. Chen RC. The peace and beauty of life--hospice palliative medicine. Taipei: Lotus Foundation. 2004.
6. Taiwan Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine. Hospice palliative medicine--theory and practice. Taipei: New Wen Ching Dev Publ. 2007.
7. Chao CS. Physician, life and death. Taipei: Bo Ping Cult. 2007.
8. World Health Organization. Cancer pain relief and palliative care. Geneva: World Health Organization. (Technical Report Series No 804). 1990.
9. World Health Organization . Pain relief and palliative care. In National cancer control programmes. Policies and managerial guidelines 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2002.
10. Chen RC. Medical personnel should actively promote the concept of terminal DNR. Tzu Chi Med J 2006; 18: 155-7.
11. Von Gunten CF. CPR in hospitalized patients: when is it futile? Am Fam Physician 1991; 44: 2130-4.
12. SUPPORT. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. JAMA 1995; 274: 1591-8.
13. Sidler D, Arndt HR, van Niekerk AA. Medical futility and end-of-life care. S Afr Med J 2008; 98: 284-6.
14. Chen RC. Living will for good death. Formos J Med 2008; 12(4): 470-2.
15. Lynn J, Harrel F Jr, Cohen F, et at. Prognosis of seriously ill hospitalized patients on the days before death: Implication for patient care and public policy. New Horiz 1997; 5: 56-61.
16. Tsai YS, Lin YL, Huang SJ. End-of-life care in critical illness. Taiwan J Hospice Palliat Care 2007; 12 (3): 312-20.
17. Wallace SK, Ewer MS, Picker KJ, Feeley TW. Outcome and cost implications of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the medical intensive care unit of a comprehensive cancer center. Support Care Cancer 2002; 10: 425-9.
18. Streim JE, Marshall JR. The dying elderly patient. Am Fam Physician 1988; 38: 175-83.
19. Oliver I, Eliott JA. The perception of do-not-resuscitate policies of dying patients with cancer. Psychooncology 2008; 17: 347-53.
20. Teno JM, Braco KJ, Mor V, et al. Changes in advance care planning in nursing home before and after the Patient Self Determination Act: report of a 10-state survey. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997; 45: 939-44.
21. Payne JK, Thornlow DK. Clinical perspectives on portable do-not-resucitate orders. J Gerontol Nurs 2008; 34: 11-6.
22. Chen RC. DNR does not equal to hospice palliative care. Taiwan Med J 2008; 51(4): 36-9.
23. Chen RC. How clinicians handle DNR. J Healthcare Qual 2008; 2(5): 34-7.
24. Sogyal Rinpoche (Gaffney P, Harvey A, editors). The Tibetan book of living and dying. San Francisco: Harper. 1994; p. 186.
25. Chao CS. Psychiatric mental health nursing and spiritual care. J Nurs 1998; 45(1): 16-21.
26. Taylor EJ. Spirituality, culture and cancer care. Seminars in Oncol Nurs 2001; 17(3): 197-205.
27. Weisman AD. On dying and denying. A psychiatric study of terminality. New York: Behavioral Publ. 1972; p. 36-41.
28.Hartley J. A good death. Nurs Times 2008; 104: 18-20.
29. Cheetam N. Teaching a good death. Nurs Stand 2008; 23: 62-3.
30. Hsu HW, Hu WY, Cheng SY, et al. Good death assessment of pediatric patients with terminal cancers at a palliative care unit. Taiwan J Hospice Palliat Care 2005; 10(4): 358-70.
31. Gould M. A good death is part of life. Health Serv J 2007; 117: 26-8.

*臨終關懷的人文精神


戴正德,李明濱(編):2009。醫學人文概論。台北:教育部
第七章
臨終關懷的人文精神
陳榮基
台大醫學院神經科教授
前言
醫學的目的是預防疾病、治好疾病及解除痛苦,恢復健康。醫生的天職當然是把病人救活,把疾病消滅,將痛苦解除,促進人類的健康。但是「生、老、病、死」是生命的必經過程,當生命已走到盡頭,死亡已是不可避免時,醫療從業人員,包括醫師、護理人員及所有的醫事人員,是否更應該以最大的愛心及人性的關懷,來提供給每一個病人沒有痛苦,能夠安詳有尊嚴的往生的機會?醫生要『救生』,也要『救死』,醫師照顧病人,應該是「從子宮到墳墓」(“From womb to tomb”),從出生到死亡,而最後階段的臨終關懷,更應發揮「拔苦予樂」的宗教情操與人文精神。
安寧緩和醫療的發展(1-7)
在古印度的梵文佛經中,以vihara(中文譯作「毗訶羅」或「精舍」)稱呼「修養的場所」或「僧院」;中古世紀(約西元四百多年)的天主教以hospice稱呼修道院用以接待長途朝聖者的「休息站」、「中途站」或「驛站」;並以之延伸為「照顧受傷與垂死的過路人的院舍」。直到1967年英國倫敦的兼具護士及社工身分的醫師,西西里‧桑德斯女士(Dame Cicely Saunders),創辦St. Christopher’s Hospice(1)才將此宗教用的名稱 “HOSPICE” 引用於現代的醫療機構,作為照顧癌症臨終病人之設施的稱呼。這種代表人性化醫療的復活的新制度,已在歐美乃至亞洲多國,逐漸普及,於1973年傳入日本。日本佛教醫院所辦的此設施就叫VIHARA
我國於1990年由馬偕醫院竹圍分院的放射腫瘤醫師鍾昌宏院長引進,命名為「安寧病房」,(3)1995年臺大醫院開辦「緩和醫療病房」。在(基督教)中華民國安寧照顧基金會(1990),天主教康泰醫療教育基金會癌症末期照顧中心(1993),佛教蓮花臨終關懷基金會(1994)(2007年改名佛教蓮花基金會)台灣安寧照顧協會(1995),台灣安寧緩和醫學學會(1999),台灣安寧緩和護理學會(2005),台灣臨床佛學研究協會(2007)等團體的陸續加入共同努力,以及衛生署及健保局的大力支持下,欣見安寧緩和醫療已在台灣蓬勃發展。
以緩和症狀而不以治癒疾病為目標的醫療,稱為緩和醫療(palliative care)或緩和醫學(palliative medicine)Palliate源自拉丁文palliatus palliare,意為減輕嚴重程度,即減輕<疾病>,緩和<疼痛>之意。在16世紀醫學上使用於對遭受痛苦的緩和或減輕。1990年世界衛生組織(WHO)揭示緩和醫療的原則為:「重視生命,並認為死亡是一種正常過程;生命與死亡不是對立而是連續的;緩和醫療既不加速也不延後死亡,它提供痛苦和不適症狀的解除,它整合病人心理社會和靈性層面的照顧。提供幫助病人盡可能地積極生活直至死亡的一種支持系統,它也提供協助家屬在病人照顧和死亡哀慟期間調適的一種支持系統。」(8)2002年世界衛生組織更進一步界定緩和照顧為:「它是在病人和家屬面對威脅生命之疾病,包括疼痛和其他身體、心理、社會及靈性相關問題時,利用早期辨識和毫無瑕疵的評估與治療,對苦難(suffering)的預防和解除,以改善生活品質的一種措施。」(9)。因此,在安寧緩和醫療裏,生活的品質比生命的長短更為重要。
今天醫界已將hospice carepalliative care合稱為hospice palliative care(安寧緩和照顧)
科技與人性的矛盾
在二十世紀的前半,人們大多死於家中,醫師面對絕症病人臨終時,最多是到病人家中,握著病人的手,以關懷與同理心與家屬一齊陪伴病人,走完人生最後的旅程。自1960年代以來,心肺復甦術(cardiopulmonary resuscitation, CPR)發明,繼之以不斷發展的高科技醫學,它雖然延長了人類的壽命,但並沒有提高人臨終的生活品質。反而使醫療提供者,尤其是醫師,產生了與上天爭命的妄想,也使民眾誤信醫療萬能,人定勝天。於是越來越多的人,在醫院中因為醫師的「英勇奮戰」或「善盡職守」而痛苦的死亡。醫師不能接受病人死亡的失敗,家屬認為如未經醫師最後的CPR的急救努力,是不孝或不愛,或不忍心讓家人走了。(10)現代科技的進步突飛猛進,以及社會型態的改變,很多人死於醫院或養護機構中。急救用CPR技術的不斷翻新,更使醫師充滿了堅定與死神奮戰到底以搶救病人的「高尚情操」。醫學的教育忽略了臨終醫療的教育,於是在急診室、一般病房乃至加護病房中,對於臨終行將斷氣的病人,一定使出CPR的絕招,明知搶救無益甚且對已受盡重病折磨的病人,將更增加痛苦,但還是因為認為救命救生是「醫生」的天職,不能接受病人終將在自己手上死亡的事實。家屬也因不捨,認為應讓醫生作最後的急救,才是孝順或愛心的表現。(10)
當癌症進入末期,醫師在使盡所有武功而知道無法救回病人、無法為病人解除痛苦時,往往因為不知所措而「逃離」或遺棄」病人,讓病人與家屬無奈的承受癌末種種痛苦的折磨。相反的在病人臨終時醫師又很「盡責」的執行CPR,讓已經飽受癌症折磨的病人,再一次受到極端的痛苦,含恨而終。難道醫師在面對各種疾病的末期病人時,一定要奮戰到底,不計病人痛苦的代價,明知無效,一定要以CPR為病人送終嗎?其實很多疾病的末期,CPR已是無效的醫療,不應該在這些病人身上實施:譬如,末期癌症患者、末期之多重器官系統衰竭、末期之重要器官衰竭(如肝臟衰竭、心臟衰竭、呼吸衰竭、腎臟衰竭、腦衰竭)、愛滋病患呼吸衰竭、運動神經元萎縮症呼吸衰竭等。(10-15)
醫學倫理的基本原則包括「利益病患、切勿傷害、尊重病人、公平正義」,既然對慢性衰敗的末期病人,醫學的證據已告訴我們CPR已無法利益病患,是一種無效的醫療,只會傷害病患增加痛苦時,難道醫師不能尊重病患的意志要求(尊重病人自主),不再作CPR,即接受病人不作心肺復甦術(Do not resuscitate, DNR)的意願(不再傷害病人),協助病人安詳往生嗎(利益病患)?對這些已無救治希望的病患,再行氣管插管,裝上呼吸器,送進加護病房,再逗留幾小時或幾天,延長病人的痛苦,而且不但浪費醫療資源,更佔據寶貴的加護病床,讓急需該病床救治的病人,無法進住,不也是違反公平正義的原則嗎?(16)
我國醫療法第六十條條規定:「醫院、診所遇有危急病人,應先予以適當之急救,並即依其人員及設備能力予以救治或採取必要措施,不得無故拖延。」
醫師法第二十一條規定: 「醫師對於危急之病症,不得無故不應招請,或無故遲延。」而且曾有醫師因尊重癌末病人的要求,在病人臨終時,未施行CPR,以協助病人安詳往生,而招致病人家屬的訴訟糾紛。另外衛生署於1989年的衛署醫字第786849號函的解釋,不同意病人或家屬有放棄心肺復甦術的權利。 加上家屬因為不捨或愛心、孝心的考量,往往在親人臨終時明知無效卻又要求醫師急救,醫師也害怕因為DNR是「違法行善」,反而可能挨告,大家相延成習,大部分在醫院臨終的病人都要受到最後無意義的CPR的折磨。(10,17-20)

安寧緩和醫療條例立法
美國加州在1976年通過「自然死法案」(Natural Death Act),推行「生預囑」(living will),此法案賦予國民可以在健康時,或還沒有病到沒有能力表達意願時,即以書面表達臨終時的抉擇,是選擇接受CPR或拒絕CPR(後者即選擇DNR)
     安寧緩和醫療的實施,希望在臨終時,讓病人可以選擇DNR,但又不符合我國醫界與民間的習慣,也不盡合法。為了使推動安寧緩和醫療更為合法,且更能保障所有臨終病人安詳往生的權利,安寧團隊乃積極推動「自然死法案」的立法。但是在衛生署討論時,很多學者認為在我們這個忌諱談「死」的社會,不宜將「死」字作為法案名稱。既然是安寧團隊在推動立法,就取名「安寧醫療條例」,最後在立法院審議時,因為世界趨勢已通稱「安寧緩和醫療」,所以改為「安寧緩和醫療條例」。經過很多人的努力與很多立法委員的支持,終於在2000523三讀通過此法案。也是全世界第一個將「安寧緩和醫療」的字眼列入法案的國家。也因此才會有本法第三條似是而非的敘述:本法專用名詞定義第一項: 「安寧緩和醫療:指為減輕或免除末期病人之痛苦,施予緩解性、支持性之醫療照護,或不施行心肺復甦術。」的條文,硬是將「安寧緩和醫療」與「不施行心肺復甦術」(DNR)送作堆。讓人誤以為安寧緩和醫療就是DNR。其實DNR只是安寧緩和醫療中的一項工作,并不是只要做到DNR就是提供了安寧緩和醫療了;而且DNR可以適用於所有臨終病人,并非只適用於住在安寧病房的病人。(21,22)本法第七條規定:「不施行心肺復甦術,應符合下列規定:一、應有二位醫師診斷確定為末期病人。二、應有意願人簽署之意願書。」而且「末期病人意識昏迷或無法清楚表達意願時,第一項第二款之意願書,由其最近親屬出具同意書代替之。」安寧緩和醫療條例是提供國民選擇CPRDNR的權力的法案;而DNR是完成安寧緩和醫療減輕病人痛苦,協助病人安詳往生的一個重要環節。(21,22)本法定義「末期病人」為:「指罹患嚴重傷病經醫師診斷認為不可治癒,且有醫學上之證據,近期內病程進行至死亡已不可避免者。」
另外一點讓醫界認為為德不足的是本法只同意「不予(withhold)CPR,但不同意「撤除(withdraw)」已經插上去的氣管內管或呼吸器。儘管「不予」與「撤除」CPR的措施是符合醫學倫理的,在DNR的執行上有相同的意義,但是2000年立法時被立法委員將「撤除」的條文給擋了下來。2002年修法時,在第七條加了最後一項:「末期病人符合第一項(應由二位醫師診斷為末期病人)、第二項(應有意願人簽署之意願書)規定不施行心肺復甦術之情形時,原施予之心肺復甦術,得予終止或撤除。」賦予病人若自行簽署DNR意願書者,萬一在匆忙中被插上了氣管內插管,如未能恢復意識及呼吸能力,則可尊重病人的意願,撤除插管及呼吸器。如果病人沒有簽署意願書,立法委員們基於對人性本善的懷疑,還是不肯同意由家屬代為決定的撤除行為(怕久病無孝子?)。要完全達到不予及撤除都合法,只好等下次再修法了。儘管本法不盡完善,但它已賦予我國國民可以在臨終時選擇接受心肺復甦術(CPR)或拒絕心肺復甦術(即選擇DNR)的權力,使推動安寧緩和醫療有了法律的加持與保障。
「安寧緩和醫療條例」規定自己簽署不施行心肺復甦術(DNR)意願書或家人簽署不施行心肺復甦術同意書的病人,如罹患末期疾病,臨終時可以不再受到CPR的折磨。但如在急救過程中,已被接上呼吸器,結果未能恢復呼吸時,曾自己簽署意願書者,得以撤除呼吸器。自己未簽署意願書者,則依法不能撤除呼吸器,只好讓病人及家人繼續承受痛苦,直到心跳自然停止。但對後者,如果家屬提出DNR同意書,可以不再給予呼吸器以外的CPR措施,如:「體外心臟按壓、急救藥物注射、心臟電擊、心臟人工調頻或其他救治行為。」(22)
如何推廣DNR的理念與實務?
醫療人員應該努力教育病人及社會大眾,選擇DNR的權利,譬如醫院可在住院須知中告知病人:(20-22)「根據<安寧緩和醫療條例>,人人有權簽署『預立不施行心肺復甦術意願書』或『預立選擇安寧緩和醫療意願書』(DNR意願書)」,將可減少很多人臨終時的痛苦。最好在健康時或輕病時,就談好此問題,因為當一個人年紀大了或病重了,反而不便啟齒,談論死亡的議題。一般人可在健康時就簽署此「DNR意願書」,交一份給經常就診的醫院,身上也帶一份,以備不時之需。但為了減少身上要經常攜帶此意願書的麻煩,在安寧團隊的建議下,衛生署及健保局已實施將民眾簽署的「DNR意願書」註記入健保憑證IC卡的便民措施。
簽署預立選擇安寧緩和醫療意願書(DNR意願書)需要有兩位見證人,這兩位見證人最好是自己的配偶及子女,讓他們知道自己的意願,最後能協助此意願的順利執行。任何成年人都可做見證人,見證人的任務是證明該意願書是立意願人親自填寫的。醫院可協助將該意願書正本郵寄給台灣安寧照顧協會(25160 台北縣淡水鎮民生路45)(www.tho.org.tw),協會將彙整後送衛生署轉健保局登錄於健保IC卡。簽署人可於一個月後至醫院或診所要求下載DNR註記資料於IC卡及醫院電子病歷中;醫療人員可將IC卡插入讀卡機,與健保局連線,點選電子病歷畫面的 [更新資料] [取卡號]或「下載基本資料」欄位,將健保局的資料下載至病人IC卡內,並紀錄於電子病歷中(此動作不需使用醫師卡)。一旦將此意願下載到IC卡,以後不必再與健保局連線,醫療人員可在將IC卡插入讀卡機後點選[器官捐贈及安寧緩和醫療註記]欄,即可讀出[同意安寧緩和醫療][同意DNR][同意器捐]的意願。並將之轉錄於病歷中。
這格欄位在健保局的檔案中,如果病人未註記則是空白,如果是<1>表示同意器官捐贈,<4>表示同意器官捐贈及同意選擇安寧緩和醫療,<7>表示同意選擇安寧緩和醫療。醫院呈現時,也可簡化為<空白>未註記,<1>同意器捐,<4>同意器捐及同意DNR<7>同意DNR。讓醫師可以一目了然。恩主公醫院甚至電腦設計成在此欄位內一閃一閃的「同意DNR」或「同意器捐」的字眼,很顯目的提醒醫療人員。
醫院除了在電子病歷上明顯的展示此DNR意願外,也可在紙本病歷的第一或二頁以紅色印章註記病人的DNR意願。如果病人只向醫院提出DNR意願書,沒有或來不及做IC卡註記,醫院可在電子病歷及紙本病歷上記載「此病人已在本院簽署DNR意願書」。甚至安寧團隊的病人,在居家照顧時,安寧團隊可提供一份DNR意願書的副本給急診室的檢傷分類站做參考,減少有時病人在匆忙中被送回急診時,被不幸插管的失誤。
急診室的檢傷分類站的工作程序(SOP),對於重症病人,應該包括迅速諮詢家屬DNR的意願,如無家屬,應迅速讀取病人身上健保IC卡上「器捐及安寧欄位」的訊息,如已有DNR意願的註記,應即刻知會急救的醫師,研判病人的狀況,醫師也應設法讀取電子病歷檔上DNR意願欄,如果確認病人是末期病人,CPR已無醫療意義,病人又已登錄DNR意願,則應善待病人,減少其痛苦,協助病人安詳往生。如病人並不馬上斷氣,不要插管,可安排住進普通病房或安寧病房,讓家屬可以親切的陪伴病人,度過最後的時光。
當病人就診時,醫師可由IC卡中讀到病人DNR的意願,如果此醫師確認病人已符合安寧緩和醫療條例的「末期病人」狀態,則可遵照病人的意願,不再施予CPR,讓病人安詳往生。如果醫師認為未達末期,還值得做CPR,但做了後並未使病人恢復呼吸,只好接上人工呼吸器。此時家屬及醫師可以根據病人預立的DNR意願,將人工呼吸器撤除,不再刻意延緩病人的死亡,藉以縮短病人的痛苦時間。至於急性病人如車禍、溺水或心肌梗塞,因為不是「末期疾病」,縱使已簽署DNR意願書,醫師還是要做CPR以救治病人的。DNR意願的IC卡註記比美國人攜帶式DNR意願書(portable DNR order)(23)的建議更方便了。

CPRDNR的兩難
在安寧緩和醫療條例立法前,曾有醫師因為尊重病人DNR的要求,結果被家屬告到法院纏訟多年的案例。安寧緩和醫療條例立法後,也有急診醫師為94歲慢性阻塞性肺疾(COPD)老婦CPR插管,家屬告到法院,並到急診室追殺醫師的不幸事件。更有病人已簽署DNR意願書,臨危家屬護送來急診室,要求CPR,事後反告醫師違反病人DNR意願。因此奉勸醫師們,如果不能說服家屬尊重病人DNR的意願,要屈從家屬CPR的要求時,一定要取得家屬要求CPR的書面證據,免得該家屬或不在場的另一位家屬持病人DNR意願書的副本興訟。(22)                        
當醫師在選擇CPRDNR時,應該慎重評估:病人病情是否符合末期疾病?CPR是否只會增加病人痛苦,無法救回生命?是否有DNR的意願書、同意書或ICDNR意願的註記?當病人與家屬意見或家屬之間意見不一時,儘量設法說服家屬,尊重病人意願;如家屬堅持違反病人DNR意願,要求做CPR,宜獲取書面意見書,做為依據,儘量合情也合法。當面臨抉擇兩難時,對病人的「愛心」是最重要的,醫學倫理的要求是依「病人最大利益」作標準,而行為合法也很重要。對病況不佳病人早點討論並簽署DNR意願書可減少臨終時不必要的醫療糾紛。(21-22)
有人質疑既然已簽署DNR意願書/同意書,為何在臨終時又將病人送來急診室而不留在家中壽終正寢安詳往生?其實臨終將病人送來急診室的理由很多:可能是家屬不捨的心理或怕親友指責不孝或不愛,也可能是不知道是否已到了CPR/急救無效的程度(醫師應可適時解說,讓家屬釋懷,接受DNR)有人是因為公寓住宅不方便處理後事/安放屍體,送來醫院較方便。也有因為怕在家中過世,不方便拿到死亡診斷書(安寧居家療護或家庭醫師制度可以解決此困擾,讓病人可以在家安詳往生,仍有醫護人員到家中確認死亡,開立死亡診斷書)。也有人是因為要等待遠方親人趕來送行或財產尚未處理好,而需要CPR維持一段時間。因此不要以為送來急診室的危急病人都是要CPR的,應仔細與家屬討論,採取最恰當的醫療措施。衛生署希望各級醫院的急診檢傷分類站應有如下的標準作業程序(SOP) 病人呼吸困難緊急送醫時,如無家屬陪同,應設法取得其身上的健保IC卡,迅速閱讀病人基本資料中的「器捐及安寧緩和註記欄」,是否有器捐或DNR意願的註記或病人電子病歷中有否DNR的註記。迅速通知醫師DNR(或器捐)意願。如有家屬陪同,醫師可詢問家屬要CPRDNR,並請其簽署DNR同意書。醫師評估病人是否符合末期病人的條件,CPR是否已是無效醫療,如是則應尊重病人意願,溝通家屬的同意,不再CPR,協助病人安詳往生。
有些病人向醫院提出DNR意願書或同意書,但未做IC卡註記,可能被忽視,成為漏洞,導致倉促中未及看到紙本病歷資料而被插管,引起家屬抱怨。醫院可於電子病歷及紙本病歷中加入一欄:[此病人已於本院提出DNR意願書或同意書]。可彌補未做IC卡註記的漏洞。重症病人,宜慎重與家屬討論DNR/CPR議題,早點簽下DNR意願書或同意書。也讓家屬有心理準備,以免臨終處置慌亂,插管與否,都容易招致醫療糾紛。家屬或病人有DNR意願表示時,宜趁勢提供DNR文件供簽署。病人病程尚未到達昏迷或未能表示意願的程度前,家屬填的DNR同意書,宜等病人昏迷後再填日期,比較符合目前安寧緩和醫療條例的規定。
健保ICDNR意願的註記是「圓滿生命的守護者,給您與所愛的人帶來平靜善終的福氣。」我們應積極向民眾宣導:請不要放棄您的神聖權益,及早做DNR善終的規劃。我們也應積極向醫療人員宣導:請不要怠忽您的神聖職責,僅早協助病人完成DNR的規劃,保障每一個病人都能安詳往生。
安詳往生是所有宗教的要求也是重要的人權
在安寧緩和醫療裏,病人的靈性和情緒照顧與醫療照顧是同等重要,我們要提供病人身體上的舒適、心理上的舒適及靈性上的舒適。索甲仁波切希望:「讓全世界的醫師能夠非常認真地允許臨終者在寧靜和安詳中去世。我要呼籲醫界人士以他們的善意,設法讓非常艱苦的死亡過程盡可能變得放鬆、無痛苦與安詳。安詳地去世,確實是一項重要的人權。所有宗教傳統都告訴我們,臨終者的精神未來和福祉,大大地倚賴這種權力。沒有哪一種佈施會大過協助一個人好好地死。」(24)因為協助一個人安詳往生,有可能是協助一個人成佛。基督徒也希望最後能「蒙主恩召」,平和的回到天堂,不再受痛苦的折磨。
「離苦得樂」,是大部分宗教的要求,「拔苦予樂」,去除人世間的痛苦,給予永恆的快樂,是菩薩的悲願。以安寧緩和醫療的精神及技術,提供末期病人臨終的人性化照顧,目的就是要解除病人身心靈的痛苦,當然更不忍心在最後關頭以CPR增加病人的痛苦。(17,22,24)
安寧緩和醫療是團隊的醫療與全人的醫療
在台灣,安寧照顧開始於馬偕醫院的放射腫瘤科醫師,臺大醫院開啟了家醫科醫師積極參與安寧緩和醫療的實務。以後又有老人科、腫瘤科、麻醉科、神經科、精神科、內科、外科醫師等的加入。而大量護理人員的參與,才奠定了安寧病房的穩定基礎。社工師以及志工的加入更使團隊茁壯。接下來藥師職能治療師心理師也加入照顧的團隊。宗教師或神職人員(牧靈人員),包括牧師、修女、神父與法師(和尚或尼師),更是妥善照顧病人所不可少的成員。台灣不分公私立醫院,都能接受宗教師的參與,是我們病人的最大福氣。在日本,甚至新加坡,公立醫院就無法接受宗教師,使日本及新加坡的緩和醫療的靈性照顧,多少有些遺憾。畫家、藝術家、音樂家、藝人、按摩師、芳香治療師乃至律師,都有人加入安寧團隊,共襄盛舉。家屬也往往是重要的一環。這個團隊要努力使冰冷的醫院變成溫馨的家庭,這個團隊,應該是要能夠傾聽病人的心聲,鼓勵病人發聲。團隊成員應以人本的精神,以人文的概念與人文的素養,加上精湛的專業能力,服務病人。
安寧的工作不但需要團隊一起來完成,每人的貢獻,都不分高下一樣的重要;而且在必要的時候,每一個人還可能要扮演多重角色。台灣安寧護理工作的先驅,趙可式博士,在英國聖克利斯多福安寧院(St. Christopher’s Hospice)見習時,曾看到一位醫師在病榻邊診療時,病人要求水喝,醫師馬上親自到飲水間去倒了一杯水來給病人,並沒有計較說為什麼要醫師去做工友的工作。任何可以幫助病人的工作,只要你做得到,都可及時伸出援手;如果你做不到,就要尋求協助。
我曾在參加一次國際安寧會議時,聽到一位希臘醫師說,有時病人失眠,是因為當他閉上眼睛,就看到一堆冤親債主過來討債;這種病人,找精神科醫師或心理師都無效,找宗教師能提供更恰當的協助。
安寧緩和醫療注重全人照顧(total care/holistic care),主張全人(身心并重)、全家、全程、全隊與全社區的五全照顧;倡導醫療、社會、心理、靈性兼顧的人本醫療。破除高科技醫療過度分工,偏重器官,偏重治「病」,忽略對「人」的缺失。導入各種人文思想於醫療領域的實務工作,特別重視病人自主,努力協助完成病人的心願。舉凡音樂、繪畫、美術、歌舞、戲劇、電影等都可運用於治療。善用社會資源,提供宗教靈性的關懷,更讓病人與家屬獲得無限的慰藉。安寧緩和病房常是醫院冰冷環境中,最為溫馨感人的場所。雖然面臨生離死別,但常能使參與的人更能體悟生命的意義。
在這個團隊中,志工人才來自社會各種行業的熱心人士,為了使志工的服務更能符合病人的需要,每一位志工,都要接受一定課程的訓練。前述(基督教)中華民國安寧照顧基金會,天主教康泰醫療教育基金會,佛教蓮花基金會以及馬偕紀念醫院安寧療護教育示範中心,都積極安排各種志工訓練課程。上述三個不同宗教基金會的投入,更使我國的安寧緩和醫療的大團隊,呈現「三教九流」,合作無間的美事。
在安寧緩和病房中,為了實踐全人照顧的精神,為了圓滿病人的心願,常常可以看到為病人開慶生會,為其子女辦婚禮,甚至為病人夫婦辦理二度蜜月慶典的溫馨活動,儼然像電影「一路玩到掛」(The Bucket List)的真實生活版。
宗教師的培訓
   Hospice一字,源自基督教文明,而第一家將hospice運用於現代醫療的機構以「聖」克利斯多福(St. Christopher)為名,(1)更顯示了安寧緩和醫療中宗教的重要角色。在天主教與基督教的歷史中,就有訓練神職人員從事「醫療傳道」的傳統,因此早就有修女神父或牧師作護士或醫師,要徵募神職人員參與安寧團隊,比較容易。馬偕醫院安寧療護教育示範中心也開辦課程培訓願意參與安寧工作的牧靈人員。但是佛教界就沒有正式訓練法師參與醫療工作的傳統,因此佛教蓮花基金會乃於台大緩和醫療病房,於1998年開辦佛教臨床宗教師的培訓工作,獲得法鼓山佛學院校長惠敏法師及台大緩和病房陳慶餘主任的支持與指導,展開佛教史上第一個正式培訓佛教臨床宗教師的工作。並由培訓出來的法師們於2007年成立了『台灣臨床佛學研究協會』。佛教的法師正式成為安寧團隊重要的一環。各類宗教師的參與大大提高安寧緩和照顧中靈性關懷的效果。(25-26)
臨終關懷是醫療的人文表現
長年在加護病房搶救人命的臺大醫院外科加護病房主任柯文哲醫師在「加護病房內的生與死」(27)一文中提到:在加護病房中「可以看見的,只見一個一個身上插滿各種管子的病人,藥物、點滴不停的輸注,」「在這裡更有看不見的各種猶豫、衝突、掙扎,病人的生死在一線之間,人世間的悲歡離合不斷上演著。」「到底醫生最大的敵人是病人的死亡,還是病人的痛苦?治療本身,不管是藥物、手術、引流、穿刺、電擊、透析、人工呼吸都可能伴隨著某些傷害和併發症。如果病人能夠挽救成功,也許對於一些治療引起的痛苦,還能忍受,但更多的情形是病人受盡折磨,依然在千瘡百孔的痛苦中嚥氣。」「加護病醫師面對一個病人時,要不要積極挽救?要救到什麼程度為止?這些問題總是不斷地浮現,也不易找到答案。」「的確有一些病況極為嚴重的病人神奇的恢復了,但在同時,卻也有一大堆的病人在死前受盡折磨,另外有一小部份的人存活了下來,但是成了植物人,繼續拖累其他家人。積極治療也許真的救了一個病人,但是也可能製造出更多的植物人。病房中一個成功的案例,會鼓舞醫護人員的心情及士氣,但那些不幸的植物人,卻要家屬無奈的承受。」(27)
醫師說:「加護病房中,不僅醫師和病人、家屬之間有各種矛盾,醫師之間也有各種衝突,手術醫師往往要求讓病人在加護病房中再住久一點,等他恢復得再好一點才轉至普通病房。」「相較之下,負責加護病房的醫師會早一點轉出看起來狀況還好的病人,以便空出床位接納其他重症病人,或者面對存活機會渺茫的病人,較早放棄侵犯的治療而改採安寧療護。」「在醫療資源有限、加護病房床位不足的狀態下,輕症的病人在加護病房中停留更多的時間,就是剝奪其他重症病人存活的機會。」「如果手術醫師把病人死亡當作其職業最大的失敗,而不看重病人的痛苦,當然會要求最多的治療,只要病人未斷氣,絕不停手。」「以前我看到一些醫師『瘋狂』的治療病人,總以為他們不是在治療病人,而是在治療家屬,現在才知道其實他們也在治療自己無法克服的價值觀──絕不可讓病人在我手中死去。」(27)
「加護病房內的生與死,無時不在上演,引起的衝突矛盾也沒有停過。當我們思考『死亡是什麼?』時,其實更應該問自己:『怎樣才算是活著?』」(27)
對於末期病人,在臨終時,我們難道還忍心讓他經歷加護病房的無意義的煎熬麼?善終是重要的人權,(24)何謂善終?一般認為符合下列各點,是善終的重要條件:(28-32)「瞭解自己死之將近,心平氣和的接受死亡,完成後事交代與安排,認為時間恰當,已準備好接受;求得生活的連續性,能與過去親友溝通聯絡道別,對過去生活的肯定;身體獲得妥善照顧,痛苦的症狀獲得滿意的控制;情緒穩定, 焦慮憂鬱能夠緩解;自主性獲得尊重;心願達成,家人的哀慟獲得輔導,沒有眷戀,沒有後顧之憂。」安寧緩和醫療的照顧,正是要提供上述的服務,讓臨終病人都能完滿達成心願,無怨、無憾、無痛、無悔的走完人生旅程。善終需要準備,做為病人,你準備好了沒?做為醫療人員,你準備好協助病人善終了嗎?
我認為「大孝與大愛並非不計親人痛苦的搶救到底,而是親切的陪伴末期病人的親人,協助他坦然接受疾病,減少他身、心、靈的痛苦,協助他放下萬緣,安詳往生。人生終需一死,絕症病人的死亡,並非醫療的失敗;未能協助病人安詳往生,才是醫療的失敗。」(10)請記住,「活著,是最好的禮物;善終,是最美的祝福。」
(本文部分英文版登載於: Chen RC. 2009. The spirit of humanism in terminal care: Taiwan experience. The Open Area Studies Journal 2: 7-11.)
【參考文獻】
    1.  URL St Christopher’s Hospicehttp://www.stchristophers.org.uk
   2.  Rong-Chi Chen’s Bloghttp://profrcchenmd.blogspot.com
   3.  Lai YL, Su WH. 1997. Palliative medicine and the hospice movement in Taiwan. Support Care Cancer 5:348-50.
   4.  Chen RC. 2002. To Learn Medicine and To Learn Buddhism. Taipei: Tow of Wisdom Publ. (陳榮基. 2002. 學醫與學佛. 台北:慧炬.)
   5.  Chen RC. 2004. The Peace and Beauty of Life—Hospice Palliative Medicine. Taipei: Lotus Foundation. (陳榮基. 2004. 生命的靜美. 台北:蓮花基金會.)
   6.  Taiwan Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine.  2007. Hospice Palliative Medicine: Theory and Practice. Taipei: New Wen Ching Dev Publ.(台灣安寧緩和醫學學會. 2007. 安寧緩和醫療理論與實務. 台北:新文京.)
   7.  Chao CS. 2007. Physician, Life and Death. Taipei: Bo Ping Cult. (趙可式.2007. 醫師與生死. 台北:寶瓶)
   8.  World Health Organization. 1990. Cancer Pain Relief and Palliative Care. Geneva: World Health Organization. (Technical Report Series No 804)
   9.  World Health Organization . 2002. Pain relief and palliative care. In National Cancer Control Programmes. Policies and Managerial Guidelines 2nd edn. Geneva: World Health Organization.
10.  Chen RC. 2006. Medical personnel should actively promote the concept of terminal DNR. Tzu Chi Med J 18: 155-7.
11.  Von Gunten CF. 1991. CPR in hospitalized patients: when is it futile? Am Fam Physician 44: 2130-4.
12.  SUPPORT. 1995. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. JAMA 274: 1591-8.
13.  Sidler D, Arndt HR, van Niekerk AA. 2008. Medical futility and end-of-life care. S Afr Med J 98: 284-6.
14.  Chen RC. 2008. Living will for good death. Formosan J Med 12(4): 470-2.
15.  Lynn J, Harrel F Jr, Cohen F, et at. 1997. Prognosis of seriously ill hospitalized patients on the days before death: Implication for patient care and public policy. New Horiz 5: 56-61.
16.  Tsai YS, Lin YL, Huang SJ. 2007. End-of-life care in critical illness. Taiwan J Hospice Palliat Care 12 (3): 312-20.
17.  Wallace SK, Ewer MS, Picker KJ, Feeley TW. 2002. Outcome and cost implications of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the medical intensive care unit of a comprehensive cancer center. Support Care Cancer 10: 425-9.
18.  Streim JE, Marshall JR. 1988. The dying elderly patient. Am Fam Physician 38: 175-83.
19.  Oliver I, Eliott JA. 2008. The perception of do-not-resuscitate policies of dying patients with cancer. Psychooncology 17: 347-53.
20.  Teno JM, Braco KJ, Mor V, et al. 1997. Changes in advance care planning in nursing home before and after the Patient Self Determination Act: report of a 10-state survey. J Am Geriatr Soc 45: 939-44.
21.  Chen RC. 2008. DNR does not equal to hospice palliative care. Taiwan Med J 51(4): 36-9.
22.  Chen RC. 2008. How clinicians handle DNR. J Healthcare Qual 2(5): 34-7.
23.  Payne JK, Thornlow DK. 2008. Clinical perspectives on portable do-not- resucitate orders. J Gerontol Nurs 34: 11-6.
24.  Sogyal Rinpoche (Ed: Gaffney P, Harvey A). 1994. The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. San Francisco: Harper. P. 186.
25.  Chao CS. 1998. Psychiatric mental health nursing and spiritual care. J Nurs 45(1): 16-21.
26.  Taylor EJ. 2001. Spirituality, culture and cancer care. Seminars in Oncol Nurs 17(3): 197-205.
27.  柯文哲。2007。柯序: 加護病房內的生與死。瓊安.卡塞爾 (Cassell, Joan)(嚴麗娟)。走進加護病房(Life and Death in Intensive Care)。台北: 原水文化
28.  Hartley J. 2008. A good death. Nurs Times 104: 18-20.
29.  Cheetam N. 2008. Teaching a good death. Nurs Stand 23: 62-3.
30.  Hsu HW, Hu WY, Cheng SY, et al. 2005. Good death assessment of pediatric patients with terminal cancers at a palliative care unit. Taiwan J Hospice Palliat Care 10(4): 358-70.
31.  Gould M. 2007. A good death is part of life. Health Serv J. 117: 26-8.
32.  Cheng SY, Hu WY, Liu WJ, Yao CA, Chen CY, Chiu TY. 2008. Good death study of elderly patients with terminal cancer in Taiwan. Palliative Medicine 22: 626-32.