R Riessen1, C Bantlin, U Wiesing, M Haap. 1. Internistische Intensivstation, Department für Innere Medizin, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Otfried-Müller-Str. 10, 72076, Tübingen, Deutschland. reimer.riessen@med.uni-tuebingen.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among the ethical principles in medicine, respect for patient autonomy has gained the highest revaluation in recent decades. In Germany this was fostered by new legal regulations which came into effect in 2009 and clarified issues regarding end-of-life (EOL) decisions. In this study the influence of direct or mediated wishes of patient wills on EOL decisions in a medical intensive care unit (ICU) were investigated. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients who died in the years 2009-2010 while being treated in the medical ICU of a large German university hospital was carried out. RESULTS: During the observation period 3,401 patients were treated in the ICU of whom 19 % (n=658) died in hospital. Of the 658 patients who died 126 (19 %) had received unlimited therapy, life support was withheld in 241 patients (37 %) and life support was withdrawn in 245 patients (37 %). In 46 patients (7 %) palliative care was instituted from the beginning of the ICU stay. In 104 cases (16 %) the patients themselves made the EOL decision and in 78 cases (12 %) an advance directive was given. A legal healthcare proxy was designated in 8 %. In 541 cases (82 %) the relatives were involved in the EOL decisions. No serious or unsolvable conflicts with relatives were experienced. Involvement of a court of law was not necessary in any of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: In a high percentage of the patients (81 %) who died during the course of intensive care treatment EOL policies were in place. The patients or their relatives were almost always involved in the decision making process. The current German law is in concordance with the established EOL practice in this intensive care unit.
BACKGROUND: Among the ethical principles in medicine, respect for patient autonomy has gained the highest revaluation in recent decades. In Germany this was fostered by new legal regulations which came into effect in 2009 and clarified issues regarding end-of-life (EOL) decisions. In this study the influence of direct or mediated wishes of patient wills on EOL decisions in a medical intensive care unit (ICU) were investigated. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients who died in the years 2009-2010 while being treated in the medical ICU of a large German university hospital was carried out. RESULTS: During the observation period 3,401 patients were treated in the ICU of whom 19 % (n=658) died in hospital. Of the 658 patients who died 126 (19 %) had received unlimited therapy, life support was withheld in 241 patients (37 %) and life support was withdrawn in 245 patients (37 %). In 46 patients (7 %) palliative care was instituted from the beginning of the ICU stay. In 104 cases (16 %) the patients themselves made the EOL decision and in 78 cases (12 %) an advance directive was given. A legal healthcare proxy was designated in 8 %. In 541 cases (82 %) the relatives were involved in the EOL decisions. No serious or unsolvable conflicts with relatives were experienced. Involvement of a court of law was not necessary in any of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: In a high percentage of the patients (81 %) who died during the course of intensive care treatment EOL policies were in place. The patients or their relatives were almost always involved in the decision making process. The current German law is in concordance with the established EOL practice in this intensive care unit.
Authors: Mitchell M Levy; R Phillip Dellinger; Sean R Townsend; Walter T Linde-Zwirble; John C Marshall; Julian Bion; Christa Schorr; Antonio Artigas; Graham Ramsay; Richard Beale; Margaret M Parker; Herwig Gerlach; Konrad Reinhart; Eliezer Silva; Maurene Harvey; Susan Regan; Derek C Angus Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Simon Cohen; 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 Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-07-22 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Peter E Spronk; Alexej V Kuiper; Johannes H Rommes; Joke C Korevaar; Marcus J Schultz Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Elie Azoulay; Barbara Metnitz; Charles L Sprung; Jean-François Timsit; François Lemaire; Peter Bauer; Benoît Schlemmer; Rui Moreno; Philipp Metnitz Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2008-10-10 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Jean Roger Le Gall; Anke Neumann; François Hemery; Jean Pierre Bleriot; Jean Pierre Fulgencio; Bernard Garrigues; Christian Gouzes; Eric Lepage; Pierre Moine; Daniel Villers Journal: Crit Care Date: 2005-10-06 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: K Adler; D Schlieper; D Kindgen-Milles; S Meier; J Schwartz; P van Caster; M S Schaefer; M Neukirchen Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Christiane S Hartog; F Hoffmann; A Mikolajetz; S Schröder; A Michalsen; K Dey; R Riessen; U Jaschinski; M Weiss; M Ragaller; S Bercker; J Briegel; C Spies; D Schwarzkopf Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Geraldine de Heer; Bernd Saugel; Barbara Sensen; Charlotte Rübsteck; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Stefan Kluge Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2017-06-05 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: J Berendt; C Ostgathe; S T Simon; M Tewes; D Schlieper; M Schallenburger; S Meier; S Gahr; J Schwartz; M Neukirchen Journal: Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 0.840
Authors: Moritz Allner; Magdalena Gostian; Matthias Balk; Robin Rupp; Clarissa Allner; Konstantinos Mantsopoulos; Christoph Ostgathe; Heinrich Iro; Markus Hecht; Antoniu-Oreste Gostian Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 3.234