This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0272989X08316999v1 28/5/763    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Volk, M. L. Articles by Vijan, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Volk, M. L. Articles by Vijan, S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Beyond Utilitarianism: A Method for Analyzing Competing Ethical Principles in a Decision Analysis of Liver Transplantation

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Anna S. F. Lok, MD

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Peter A. Ubel, MD

Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Center for Behavioral and Decision Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Sandeep Vijan, MD

Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Background: The utilitarian foundation of decision analysis limits its usefulness for many social policy decisions. In this study, the authors examine a method to incorporate competing ethical principles in a decision analysis of liver transplantation for a patient with acute liver failure (ALF). Methods. A Markov model was constructed to compare the benefit of transplantation for a patient with ALF versus the harm caused to other patients on the waiting list and to determine the lowest acceptable 5-y posttransplant survival for the ALF patient. The weighting of the ALF patient and other patients was then adjusted using a multiattribute variable incorporating utilitarianism, urgency, and other principles such as fair chances. Results. In the base-case analysis, the strategy of transplanting the ALF patient resulted in a 0.8% increase in the risk of death and a utility loss of 7.8 quality-adjusted days of life for each of the other patients on the waiting list. These harms cumulatively outweighed the benefit of transplantation for an ALF patient having a posttransplant survival of less than 48% at 5 y. However, the threshold for an acceptable posttransplant survival for the ALF patient ranged from 25% to 56% at 5 y, depending on the ethical principles involved. Discussion. The results of the decision analysis vary depending on the ethical perspective. This study demonstrates how competing ethical principles can be numerically incorporated in a decision analysis.

Key Words: Key words: liver transplantation • acute liver failure • ethical theory • decision support techniques.

This version was published on September 1, 2008

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 28, No. 5, 763-772 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08316999


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?