Literature DB >> 26725047

US Physicians' Opinions about Distinctions between Withdrawing and Withholding Life-Sustaining Treatment.

Grace S Chung1, John D Yoon2, Kenneth A Rasinski3, Farr A Curlin4.   

Abstract

Decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment (LST) precede the majority of ICU deaths. Although professional guidelines generally treat the two as ethically equivalent, evidence suggests withdrawing LST is often more psychologically difficult than withholding it. The aim of the experiment was to investigate whether physicians are more supportive of withholding LST than withdrawing it and to assess how physicians' opinions are shaped by their religious characteristics, specialty, and experience caring for dying patients. In 2010, a survey was mailed to 2016 practicing US physicians. Physicians were asked whether physicians should always comply with a competent patient's request to withdraw LST, whether withdrawing LST is more psychologically difficult than withholding it, and whether withdrawing LST is typically more ethically problematic than withholding it. Of 1880 eligible physicians, 1156 responded to the survey (62%); 93% agreed that physicians should always comply with a competent patient's request to withdraw LST. More than half of the physicians reported that they find withdrawing LST more psychologically difficult than withholding it (61%), and that withdrawing LST is typically more ethically problematic (59%). Physician religiosity was associated with finding withdrawal more ethically problematic, but not with finding it more psychologically difficult. Physicians working in an end-of-life specialty and physicians with more experience caring for dying patients were less likely to endorse either a psychological or an ethical distinction between withdrawing and withholding LST. Most US physicians find withdrawing LST not only more psychologically difficult, but also more ethically problematic than withholding such treatment. Physicians' opinions are to some extent shaped by their religious characteristics, specialty, and levels of experience caring for dying patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  End-of-life care; Ethics; Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment; Withholding life-sustaining treatment

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26725047     DOI: 10.1007/s10943-015-0171-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Relig Health        ISSN: 0022-4197


  35 in total

Review 1.  Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: a surgeon's perspective.

Authors:  Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 2.  Meeting physicians' responsibilities in providing end-of-life care.

Authors:  Hasan Shanawani; Marjorie D Wenrich; Mark R Tonelli; J Randall Curtis
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Decisions at the end of life.

Authors:  J A Balint
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.351

4.  Position of the American Academy of Neurology on certain aspects of the care and management of the persistent vegetative state patient. Adopted by the Executive Board, American Academy of Neurology, April 21, 1988, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Authors: 
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 9.910

5.  Decisions near the end of life: professional views on life-sustaining treatments.

Authors:  M Z Solomon; L O'Donnell; B Jennings; V Guilfoy; S M Wolf; K Nolan; R Jackson; D Koch-Weser; S Donnelley
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  A costly separation between withdrawing and withholding treatment in intensive care.

Authors:  Dominic Wilkinson; Julian Savulescu
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 1.898

Review 7.  Ethical decision making with end-of-life care: palliative sedation and withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments.

Authors:  Molly L Olsen; Keith M Swetz; Paul S Mueller
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2010-08-30       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 8.  Clinical, ethical and legal considerations in the treatment of newborns with non-ketotic hyperglycinaemia.

Authors:  A Boneh; S Allan; D Mendelson; M Spriggs; L H Gillam; S H Korman
Journal:  Mol Genet Metab       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 4.797

9.  A "little bit illegal"? Withholding and withdrawing of mechanical ventilation in the eyes of German intensive care physicians.

Authors:  Sabine Beck; Andreas van de Loo; Stella Reiter-Theil
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2007-10-16

10.  Are withholding and withdrawing therapy always morally equivalent?

Authors:  D P Sulmasy; J Sugarman
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.903

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  A few realistic questions raised by organ retrieval in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Olivier Lesieur; Liliane Genteuil; Maxime Leloup
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-12

2.  "We're Not Ready, But I Don't Think You're Ever Ready." Clinician Perspectives on Implementation of Crisis Standards of Care.

Authors:  Elizabeth Chuang; Pablo A Cuartas; Tia Powell; Michelle Ng Gong
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2020-05-05

3.  Understanding the role of religious views in the discussion about resuscitation at the threshold of viability.

Authors:  J McGuirl; D Campbell
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.521

4.  Withdrawing or withholding treatments in health care rationing: an interview study on ethical views and implications.

Authors:  Liam Strand; Lars Sandman; Gustav Tinghög; Ann-Charlotte Nedlund
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 2.834

5.  Muslim American physicians' views on brain death: Findings from a national survey.

Authors:  Sadaf Popal; Stephen Hall; Aasim I Padela
Journal:  Avicenna J Med       Date:  2021-04-19

6.  Does special education in palliative medicine make a difference in end-of-life decision-making?

Authors:  Reetta P Piili; Juho T Lehto; Tiina Luukkaala; Heikki Hinkka; Pirkko-Liisa I Kellokumpu-Lehtinen
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 3.234

7.  Withdrawal Aversion and the Equivalence Test.

Authors:  Dominic Wilkinson; Ella Butcherine; Julian Savulescu
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 11.229

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.