Literature DB >> 16574871

The impact of regional culture on intensive care end of life decision making: an Israeli perspective from the ETHICUS study.

F D Ganz1, J Benbenishty, M Hersch, A Fischer, G Gurman, C L Sprung.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Decisions of patients, families, and health care providers about medical care at the end of life depend on many factors, including the societal culture. A pan-European study was conducted to determine the frequency and types of end of life practices in European intensive care units (ICUs), including those in Israel. Several results of the Israeli subsample were different to those of the overall sample.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article was to explore these differences and provide a possible explanation based on the impact of culture on end of life decision making.
METHOD: All adult patients admitted consecutively to three Israeli ICUs (n = 2778) who died or underwent any limitation of life saving interventions between 1 January 1999 and 30 June 2000 were studied prospectively (n = 363). These patients were compared with a similar sample taken from the larger study (ethics in European intensive care units: ETHICUS) carried out in 37 European ICUs. Patients were followed until discharge, death, or 2 months from the decision to limit therapy. End of life decisions were prospectively organised into one of five mutually exclusive categories: cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), brain death, withholding treatment, withdrawing treatment, and active shortening of the dying process (SDP). The data also included patient characteristics (gender, age, ICU admission diagnosis, chronic disorders, date of hospital admission, date and time of decision to limit therapy, date of hospital discharge, date and time of death in hospital), specific therapies limited, and the method of SDP.
RESULTS: The majority of patients (n = 252, 69%) had treatment withheld, none underwent SDP, 62 received CPR (17%), 31 had brain death (9%), and 18 underwent withdrawal of treatment (5%). The primary reason given for limiting treatment was that the patient was unresponsive to therapy (n = 187). End of life discussions were held with 132 families (36%), the vast majority of which revolved around withholding treatment (91% of the discussions) and the remainder concerned withdrawing treatment (n = 11, 9%). There was a statistically significant association (chi2 = 830.93, df = 12, p < 0.0001) between the type of end of life decision and region-that is, the northern region of Europe, the central region, the southern region, and Israel.
CONCLUSIONS: Regional culture plays an important part in end of life decision making. Differences relating to end of life decision making exist between regions and these differences can often be attributed to cultural factors. Such cultures not only affect patients and their families but also the health care workers who make and carry out such decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16574871      PMCID: PMC2565781          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.012542

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  30 in total

Review 1.  Cultural differences in end-of-life care.

Authors:  J L Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 7.598

2.  Do-not-resuscitate orders in Swedish medical wards.

Authors:  K Asplund; M Britton
Journal:  J Intern Med       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 8.989

Review 3.  Bioethics for clinicians: 21. Islamic bioethics.

Authors:  A S Daar; A B al Khitamy
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-01-09       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Historical and philosophical reflections on patient autonomy.

Authors:  A I Tauber
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2001

5.  Futility and the ethics of resuscitation.

Authors:  T Tomlinson; H Brody
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-09-12       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Cultural competence for critical care nursing practice.

Authors:  L W Covington
Journal:  Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.326

7.  A cross-cultural comparison of critical care delivery: Japan and the United States.

Authors:  Carl A Sirio; Kimitaka Tajimi; Nobuyuki Taenaka; Yoshihito Ujike; Kazufumi Okamoto; Hirotada Katsuya
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study.

Authors:  Charles L Sprung; Simon L Cohen; Peter Sjokvist; Mario Baras; Hans-Henrik Bulow; Seppo Hovilehto; Didier Ledoux; Anne Lippert; Paulo Maia; Dermot Phelan; Wolfgang Schobersberger; Elisabet Wennberg; Tom Woodcock
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-08-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Ethical issues in end-of-life geriatric care: the approach of three monotheistic religions-Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam.

Authors:  A Mark Clarfield; Michael Gordon; Hazel Markwell; Shabbir M H Alibhai
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.562

10.  Intensive care physicians' attitudes concerning distribution of intensive care resources. A comparison of Israeli, North American and European cohorts.

Authors:  Sharon Einav; Ethan Soudry; Phillip D Levin; Gershon B Grunfeld; Charles L Sprung
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2004-04-06       Impact factor: 17.440

View more
  14 in total

1.  Pattern of end-of-life decisions in two Tunisian intensive care units: the role of culture and intensivists' training.

Authors:  Islem Ouanes; Néji Stambouli; Fahmi Dachraoui; Lamia Ouanes-Besbes; Samir Toumi; Faouzi Ben Salem; Mourad Gahbiche; Fekri Abroug
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-02-11       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 2.  Global variability in withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit: a systematic review.

Authors:  N M Mark; S G Rayner; N J Lee; J R Curtis
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Recommendations to limit life support: a national survey of critical care physicians.

Authors:  David R Brush; Kenneth A Rasinski; Jesse B Hall; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Making good death more accessible: end-of-life care in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Anita Ho; Daniel Fu-Chang Tsai
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-06-03       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Race Differences in Gastrostomy Tube Placement After Stroke in Majority-White, Minority-Serving, and Racially Integrated US Hospitals.

Authors:  Roland Faigle; Lisa A Cooper; Rebecca F Gottesman
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 3.438

6.  Moral obligations of nurses and physicians in neonatal end-of-life care.

Authors:  Elizabeth Gingell Epstein
Journal:  Nurs Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.874

7.  Deciding in the dark: advance directives and continuation of treatment in chronic critical illness.

Authors:  Sharon L Camhi; Alice F Mercado; R Sean Morrison; Qingling Du; David M Platt; Gary I August; Judith E Nelson
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 7.598

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.  Diagnostic and ethical challenges in disorders of consciousness and locked-in syndrome: a survey of German neurologists.

Authors:  Katja Kuehlmeyer; Eric Racine; Nicole Palmour; Eva Hoster; Gian Domenico Borasio; Ralf J Jox
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 4.849

10.  Euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions: a mortality follow-back study in Belgium.

Authors:  Lieve Van den Block; Reginald Deschepper; Johan Bilsen; Nathalie Bossuyt; Viviane Van Casteren; Luc Deliens
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-03-09       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.