Explore the vast range of titles available.

To investigate staff attitudes toward assisted suicide in the hospital setting in Switzerland. Cross-sectional study. Two University Hospitals in French speaking regions of Switzerland. 13'834 health care professionals, including all personnel caring for patients, were invited to participate. Attitudes towards the participation of hospital health care professionals in assisted suicide were investigated with an online questionnaire. Among all invited professionals, 5'127 responded by filling in the survey at least partially (response rate 37.0%), and 3'683 completed the entire survey (26.6%). 73.0% of participants approved that this practice should be authorized in their hospital and saw more positive than negative effects. 57.6% would consider assisted suicide for themselves. Non-medical professionals were 1.28 to 5.25 times more likely to approve assisted suicide than physicians (p<0.001). 70.7% of respondents indicated that each professional should have the choice of whether to assist in suicide. This multiprofessional survey sheds light on hospital staff perceptions of assisted suicide happening within hospital walls, which may inform the development of rules considering their wishes but also their reluctances. Further research using a mixed-methods approach could help reach an in-depth understanding of staff's attitudes and considerations towards assisted suicide practices.

Abstract Rationale Many sources of conflict exist in intensive care units (ICUs). Few studies recorded the prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors for conflicts in ICUs. Objectives To record the prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors for conflicts in ICUs. Methods One-day cross-sectional survey of ICU clinicians. Data on perceived conflicts in the week before the survey day were obtained from 7,498 ICU staff members (323 ICUs in 24 countries). Measurements and Main Results Conflicts were perceived by 5,268 (71.6%) respondents. Nurse–physician conflicts were the most common (32.6%), followed by conflicts among nurses (27.3%) and staff-relative conflicts (26.6%). The most common conflict-causing behaviors were personal animosity, mistrust, and communication gaps. During end-of-life care, the main sources of perceived conflict were lack of psychological support, absence of staff meetings, and problems with the decision-making process. Conflicts perceived as severe were reported by 3,974 (53%) respondents. Job strain was significantly associated with perceiving conflicts and with greater severity of perceived conflicts. Multivariate analysis identified 15 factors associated with perceived conflicts, of which 6 were potential targets for future intervention: staff working more than 40 h/wk, more than 15 ICU beds, caring for dying patients or providing pre- and postmortem care within the last week, symptom control not ensured jointly by physicians and nurses, and no routine unit-level meetings. Conclusions Over 70% of ICU workers reported perceived conflicts, which were often considered severe and were significantly associated with job strain. Workload, inadequate communication, and end-of-life care emerged as important potential targets for improvement.

Background The need for an ethical debate about the use of coercion in intensive care units (ICU) may not be as obvious as in other areas of medicine, such as psychiatry. Coercive measures are often necessary to treat critically ill patients in the ICU. It is nevertheless important to keep these measures to a minimum in order to respect the dignity of patients and the cohesion of the clinical team. A deeper understanding of what patients and their relatives perceive during their ICU stay will shed different light on intensive care management. Patients' experiences of loss of control, dependency and abandonment may lead to a new approach towards a broader approach to the concept of coercion in intensive care. The aim of our research is to explore the experiences of patients and relatives in the ICU and to determine when it might be possible to reduce feelings and memories of coercion. Methods We conducted and analysed 29 semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives who had been in the ICU a few months previously. Following a coding and categorisation process in MAXQDA™, a rigorous qualitative methodology was used to identify themes relevant to our research. Results Five main themes emerged: memory issues; interviewees’ experiences of restricting measures and coercive treatment; patients’ negative perception of situational and relational dependency with the risk of informal coercion; patients’ perceptions of good care in a context of perceived dependency; progression from perception of coercion and dependency to respect for the person. All patients were grateful to have survived. However, coercion in the form of restraint, restriction of movement, and coercive treatment in the ICU was also acknowledged by patients and relatives. These included elements of informal coercion beyond restraints, such as a perceived negative sense of dependence, surrender, and asymmetrical interaction between the patient and health providers. Conclusions To capture the full range of patients' experiences of coercion, it is necessary to expand the concept of coercion to include less obvious forms of informal coercion that may occur in dependency situations. This will help identify solutions to avoid or reduce negative recollections that may persist long after discharge and negatively affect the patients' quality of life.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and forms of gender discrimination and sexual harassment experienced by medical students and physicians in French-speaking part of Switzerland.Design and settingWe conducted an online survey using a questionnaire of 9 multiple-choice and 2 open questions between 24 January 2019 and 24 February 2019. Our target population was medical students and physicians working at hospitals and general practitioners from the French-speaking part of Switzerland. The online survey was sent via social media platforms and direct emails. We compared answers between male-determined and female-determined respondents using either χ2 or Fisher’s exact tests.ResultsAmong 1071 responders, a total of 893 were included (625 females, 264 males, 4 non-binary and 1 non-binary and male). 178 were excluded because they did not mention their working place or were working only outside Switzerland. Because of the small number of non-binary participants, they were not contemplated in further statistical analysis. Of 889 participants left, 199 (31.8%) women and 18 (6.8%) men reported having personally experienced gender discrimination, in terms of sexism, difficulties in career development and psychological pressure. Among women, senior attendings were the most affected (55.2%), followed by residents (44.1%) and junior attendings (41.1%). Sexual harassment was equally observed among women (19.0%) and men (16.7%). Compared with men (47.0%), women (61.4%) expressed the need to promote equality and inclusivity in medicine more frequently (p<0.001), as well as the need for support in their professional development (38.7% women and 23.9% men; p<0.001).ConclusionsGender discrimination in medicine in French-speaking Switzerland affects one-third of women, in particular, those working in hospital settings and senior positions.

Background Intensive care Unit (ICU) admission decisions involve collaboration between internists and intensivists. Clear perception of each other’s roles is a prerequisite for good collaboration. The objective was to explore how internists and intensivists perceive their roles during admission decisions. Methods Individual in-depth interviews with 12 intensivists and 12 internists working at a Swiss teaching hospital. Interviews were analyzed using a thematic approach. Results Roles could be divided into practical roles and identity roles. Internist and intensivists had the same perception of each other’s practical roles. Internists’ practical roles were: recognizing signs of severity when the patient becomes acutely ill, calling the intensivist at the right moment, having the relevant information about the patient and having determined the goals of care. Intensivists’ practical roles were: assessing the patient on the ward, giving expert advice, making quick decisions, managing access to the ICU, having the final decision power and, sometimes, deciding whether or not to limit treatment. In complex situations, perceived flaws in performing practical roles could create tensions between the doctors. Intensivists’ identity roles included those of leader, gatekeeper, life-death decision maker, and supporting colleague doctors (consultant, senior and helper). These roles could be perceived as emotionally burdensome. Internists’ identity roles were those of leader and partner. Conclusions Despite a common perception of each other’s practical roles, tensions can arise between internists and intensivists in complex situations of ICU admission decisions. Training in communication skills and interprofessional education interventions aimed at a better understanding of each other roles would improve collaboration.

Objective To evaluate physicians' reasoning, considerations and possible difficulties in end-of-life decision-making for patients in European intensive care units (ICUs). Design A prospective observational study. Setting Thirty-seven ICUs in 17 European countries. Patients and participants A total of 3,086 patients for whom an end-of-life decision was taken between January 1999 and June 2000. The dataset excludes patients who died after attempts at cardiopulmonary resuscitation and brain-dead patients. Measurements and results Physicians indicated which of a pre-determined set of reasons for, considerations in, and difficulties with end-of-life decision-making was germane in each case as it arose. Overall, 2,134 (69%) of the decisions were documented in the medical record, with inter-regional differences in documentation practice. Primary reasons given by physicians for the decision mostly concerned the patient's medical condition (79%), especially unresponsive to therapy (46%), while chronic disease (12%), quality of life (4%), age (2%) and patient or family request (2%) were infrequent. Good medical practice (66%) and best interests (29%) were the commonest primary considerations reported, while resource allocation issues such as cost effectiveness (1%) and need for an ICU bed (0%) were uncommon. Living wills were considered in only 1% of cases. Physicians in central Europe reported no significant difficulty in 81% of cases, while in northern and southern regions there was no difficulty in 92–93% of cases. Conclusions European ICU physicians do not experience difficulties with end-of-life decisions in most cases. Allocation of limited resources is a minor consideration and autonomous choices by patient or family remain unusual. Inter-regional differences were found.

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. 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. 37 European ICUs in 17 countries. ICU physicians collected data on 4,248 patients. 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%). 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.

Physical restraint, defned as any physical or mechanicaldevice, material, or equipment immobilizing or obstructinga person’s ability to move freely [1], includes 2-pointor 4-point wrist or leg restraints, waist or chest restraints,and mittens. Although the international prevalence ofphysical restraint in the intensive care unit (ICU) settingis highly variable [2], in some countries use is ubiquitous,particularly for mechanically ventilated patients.For example, in a survey of physicians representing 121ICUs in France, 82% reported more than 50% of mechanicallyventilated patients were restrained at least once[3]. In Canada, a period prevalence survey found 53%of 711 mechanically ventilated patients were physicallyrestrained for an average of 4 days [4]. Unfortunately,variation in reporting of physical restraint incidence orprevalence (e.g., proportion of patients, % days, numberof restraint orders/patient days) makes comparisonof available data problematic. More work is required tostandardize reporting that will enable better insight intotrue rates of physical restraint, particularly in the era oflighter sedation and early mobilization.