Literature DB >> 18838925

Intercontinental differences in end-of-life attitudes in the pediatric intensive care unit: results of a worldwide survey.

Denis J Devictor1, Pierre Tissieres, Jonathan Gillis, Robert Truog.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine intercontinental differences in end-of-life practices in pediatric intensive care units.
DESIGN: An international survey. The on-line questionnaire consisted of two case scenarios with five questions each. The scenarios described the management of children in pediatric intensive care units and the questions dealt with the decision-making process and the modalities of forgoing life support.
SETTING: The participants at the 5th World Congress on Pediatric Critical Care Medicine organized by the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies (June 2007, Geneva, Switzerland) were invited to participate.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Six hundred sixty seven complete questionnaires were received from 71 countries, which were grouped into six continents: Europe (52.7%), North America (17.9%) and South America (9.5%), Asia (7.6%), Australia (6%), and Middle East (4.3%). In both scenarios, physicians played the major role in decision making in all of the continents. However, parents from North America, Australia, the Middle East, and Asia seem to be more involved in the decision-making process, compared with those from Europe and South America. In cases of septic shock, caregivers from Europe and South America are more prone to forego life support despite parents' wishes. In North America and Australia, parents' presence during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is usually accepted (89.7% and 92.3%, respectively), whereas their presence is less accepted in Asia (54%) and Europe (54.8%), or much less accepted in South America (25.8%) and the Middle East (7.1%). In both scenarios, the option to withhold rather than withdraw life supports was more commonly chosen among all continents, except South America, where the withdrawal of life support was more often proposed (51.6% vs. 45.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that important intercontinental differences exist toward end-of-life issues in pediatric intensive care. Although the legal and ethical situation is rapidly evolving, a certain degree of paternalism seems to persist among European and South-American caregivers. This study suggests that ethical principles depend on the cultural roots of countries or continents, emphasizing the need to foster dialogue on end-of-life issues around the world to learn from each other and improve end-of-life care in pediatric intensive care units.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18838925     DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e31818d3581

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med        ISSN: 1529-7535            Impact factor:   3.624


  8 in total

1.  Forgoing life support: how the decision is made in European pediatric intensive care units.

Authors:  Denis J Devictor; Jos M Latour
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  A life worth giving? The threshold for permissible withdrawal of life support from disabled newborn infants.

Authors:  Dominic James Wilkinson
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 11.229

3.  Mortality patterns among critically ill children in a pediatric intensive care unit of a developing country.

Authors:  Mahmood Dhahir Al-Mendalawi
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-05

Review 4.  Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in Neonates Undergoing Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support.

Authors:  Matteo Di Nardo; Anna Dalle Ore; Giuseppina Testa; Gail Annich; Edoardo Piervincenzi; Giorgio Zampini; Gabriella Bottari; Corrado Cecchetti; Antonio Amodeo; Roberto Lorusso; Lorenzo Del Sorbo; Roxanne Kirsch
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 3.418

5.  End-of-Life Decision-Making in Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Croatia-A Focus Group Study among Nurses and Physicians.

Authors:  Filip Rubic; Marko Curkovic; Lovorka Brajkovic; Bojana Nevajdic; Milivoj Novak; Boris Filipovic-Grcic; Julije Mestrovic; Kristina Lah Tomulic; Branimir Peter; Ana Borovecki
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 2.430

6.  CHILDREN WITH MULTIPLE CONGENITAL DEFECTS: WHAT ARE THE LIMITS BETWEEN THERAPEUTIC OBSTINACY AND THE TREATMENT OF UNCERTAIN BENEFIT?

Authors:  Patricia Souza Valle Cardoso Pastura; Marcelo Gerardin Poirot Land
Journal:  Rev Paul Pediatr       Date:  2017-02-20

7.  Preferences in end of life care substantially differ between the Netherlands and Japan: Results from a cross-sectional survey study.

Authors:  A Stef Groenewoud; Noriko Sasaki; Gert P Westert; Yuichi Imanaka
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  How doctors actually (do not) involve families in decisions to continue or discontinue life-sustaining treatment in neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care: A qualitative study.

Authors:  A Aranka Akkermans; J M W J Joyce Lamerichs; M J Marcus Schultz; T G V Thomas Cherpanath; J B M Job van Woensel; M Marc van Heerde; A H L C Anton van Kaam; M D Moniek van de Loo; A M Anne Stiggelbout; E M A Ellen Smets; M A Mirjam de Vos
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 4.762

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.