Literature DB >> 16041519

Communication of end-of-life decisions in European intensive care units.

Simon Cohen1, Charles Sprung, Peter Sjokvist, Anne Lippert, Bara Ricou, Mario Baras, Seppo Hovilehto, Paulo Maia, Dermot Phelan, Konrad Reinhart, Karl Werdan, Hans-Henrik Bulow, Tom Woodcock.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine end-of-life (EOL) practices in European ICUs: who makes these decisions, how they are made, communication of these decisions and questions on communication between the physicians, nurses, patients and families.
DESIGN: Data collected prospectively on EOL decisions facilitated by a questionnaire including EOL decision categories, geographical regions, mental competency, information about patient wishes, and discussions with patients, families and health care professionals.
SETTING: 37 European ICUs in 17 countries. PATIENTS: ICU physicians collected data on 4,248 patients.
RESULTS: 95% of patients lacked decision making capacity at the time of EOL decision and patient's wishes were known in only 20% of cases. EOL decisions were discussed with the family in 68% of cases. Physicians reported having more information about patients' wishes and discussions in the northern countries (31%, 88%) than central (16%, 70%) or southern (13%, 48%) countries. The family was more often told (88%) than asked (38%) about EOL decisions. Physicians' reasons for not discussing EOL care with the family included the fact that the patient was unresponsive to therapy (39%), the family was unavailable (28%), and the family was thought not to understand (25%).
CONCLUSIONS: ICU patients typically lack decision-making capacity, and physicians know patients' wishes in only 20% of EOL decisions. There were regional differences in discussions of EOL decisions with families and other physicians. In European ICUs there seems to be a need to improve communication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16041519     DOI: 10.1007/s00134-005-2742-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


  25 in total

1.  Discrepancies between perceptions by physicians and nursing staff of intensive care unit end-of-life decisions.

Authors:  Edouard Ferrand; François Lemaire; Bernard Regnier; Khaldoun Kuteifan; Michel Badet; Pierre Asfar; Samir Jaber; Jean-Luc Chagnon; Anne Renault; René Robert; Frédéric Pochard; Christian Herve; Christian Brun-Buisson; Philippe Duvaldestin
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2003-01-24       Impact factor: 21.405

2.  Withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.

Authors:  N G Smedira; B H Evans; L S Grais; N H Cohen; B Lo; M Cooke; W P Schecter; C Fink; E Epstein-Jaffe; C May
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-02-01       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Increasing incidence of withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.

Authors:  T J Prendergast; J M Luce
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Limitation of life support: frequency and practice in a London and a Cape Town intensive care unit.

Authors:  J S Turner; W L Michell; C J Morgan; S R Benatar
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Decisions to forego life-sustaining treatment and the duty of documentation.

Authors:  G Melltorp; T Nilstun
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Preliminary evidence of impaired thinking in sick patients.

Authors:  E J Cassell; A C Leon; S G Kaufman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-06-19       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  All in the family: extended autonomy and expectations in surrogate health care decision-making.

Authors:  D M High
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  1988-06

8.  Withholding and withdrawal of life support in intensive-care units in France: a prospective survey. French LATAREA Group.

Authors:  E Ferrand; R Robert; P Ingrand; F Lemaire
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-01-06       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Active management of the dying patient.

Authors:  K Daffurn; R Kerridge; K M Hillman
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1992-11-16       Impact factor: 7.738

10.  Myth of substituted judgment. Surrogate decision making regarding life support is unreliable.

Authors:  J Suhl; P Simons; T Reedy; T Garrick
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1994-01-10
View more
  50 in total

1.  Attitudes of European physicians, nurses, patients, and families regarding end-of-life decisions: the ETHICATT study.

Authors:  Charles L Sprung; Sara Carmel; Peter Sjokvist; Mario Baras; Simon L Cohen; Paulo Maia; Albertus Beishuizen; Daniel Nalos; Ivan Novak; Mia Svantesson; Julie Benbenishty; Beverly Henderson
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Who Decides When a Patient Can't? Statutes on Alternate Decision Makers.

Authors:  Erin S DeMartino; David M Dudzinski; Cavan K Doyle; Beau P Sperry; Sarah E Gregory; Mark Siegler; Daniel P Sulmasy; Paul S Mueller; Daniel B Kramer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Year in review in intensive care medicine, 2005. II. Infection and sepsis, ventilator-associated pneumonia, ethics, haematology and haemostasis, ICU organisation and scoring, brain injury.

Authors:  Peter Andrews; Elie Azoulay; Massimo Antonelli; Laurent Brochard; Christian Brun-Buisson; Geoffrey Dobb; Jean-Yves Fagon; Herwig Gerlach; Johan Groeneveld; Jordi Mancebo; Philipp Metnitz; Stefano Nava; Jerome Pugin; Michael Pinsky; Peter Radermacher; Christian Richard; Robert Tasker
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-02-17       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Nursing strategies to support family members of ICU patients at high risk of dying.

Authors:  Judith A Adams; Ruth A Anderson; Sharron L Docherty; James A Tulsky; Karen E Steinhauser; Donald E Bailey
Journal:  Heart Lung       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 2.210

Review 5.  What are the ethical issues in relation to the role of the family in intensive care?

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Quenot; Fiona Ecarnot; Nicolas Meunier-Beillard; Auguste Dargent; Audrey Large; Pascal Andreu; Jean-Philippe Rigaud
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-12

6.  End-of-life decisions in an Indian intensive care unit.

Authors:  Raj Kumar Mani; Amit Kumar Mandal; Sabyasachi Bal; Yash Javeri; Rakesh Kumar; Deepak Kumar Nama; Praveen Pandey; Tara Rawat; Navneet Singh; Hemant Tewari; Rajiv Uttam
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  End-of-life attitudes of intensive care physicians in Poland: results of a national survey.

Authors:  Andrzej Kübler; Barbara Adamik; Malgorzata Lipinska-Gediga; Jaroslaw Kedziora; Lukasz Strozecki
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Reasons, considerations, difficulties and documentation of end-of-life decisions in European intensive care units: the ETHICUS Study.

Authors:  Charles L Sprung; Thomas Woodcock; Peter Sjokvist; Bara Ricou; Hans-Henrik Bulow; Anne Lippert; Paulo Maia; Simon Cohen; Mario Baras; Seppo Hovilehto; Didier Ledoux; Dermot Phelan; Elisabet Wennberg; Wolfgang Schobersberger
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-11-09       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Expectations and outcomes of prolonged mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  Christopher E Cox; Tereza Martinu; Shailaja J Sathy; Alison S Clay; Jessica Chia; Alice L Gray; Maren K Olsen; Joseph A Govert; Shannon S Carson; James A Tulsky
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 10.  The world's major religions' points of view on end-of-life decisions in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Hans-Henrik Bülow; Charles L Sprung; Konrad Reinhart; Shirish Prayag; Bin Du; Apostolos Armaganidis; Fekri Abroug; Mitchell M Levy
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-12-19       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.