Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose Prior studies identified high variability in prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the ICU. Variability in end-of-life decision-making has been reported at many levels: between countries, ICUs, and individual intensivists. We performed a systematic review examining regional, national, inter-hospital, and inter-physician variability in withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the ICU. Methods Using a predefined search strategy, we queried three electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles addressing withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in adult patients in the ICU. Data were analyzed for variability in prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. Withholding of life-sustaining treatment was also examined where information was provided. An assessment tool was developed to quantify the risk of bias in the included articles. Results We identified 1284 studies, with 56 included after review. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias, primarily due to unclear case definitions or potential confounding. The mean prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for patients who died varied from 0 to 84.1 % between studies, with standard deviation of 23.7 %. Sensitivity analysis of general ICU patients yielded similar results. Withholding also varied between 5.3 and 67.3 % (mean 27.3, SD 18.5 %). Substantial variability was found between world regions, countries, individual ICUs within a country, and individual intensivists within one ICU. Conclusions We identified substantial variability in the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment across world regions and countries. Similar variability existed between ICUs within countries and even between providers within the same ICU. Further study is necessary, and could lead to interventions to improve end-of-life care in the ICU.

To explore the experience of intensive care nurses when participating in the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments from intensive care unit patients. A qualitative descriptive and explorative design. Data were collected in 2017 and 2018 by interviewing nine intensive care nurses. The data were analysed by using systematic text condensation. The nine intensive care nurses interviewed worked in four different intensive care units located in one university hospital and one local hospital. Experiences when participating in the process of withdrawing life-sustaining treatments. Three categories emerged from the data analysis: ICU nurses’ experiences of stress in the process of treatment withdrawal; a requirement for interdisciplinary support and cooperation; and elements to achieve a dignified treatment withdrawal process. The intensive care nurses experienced challenges and emotional reactions when patients were overtreated or when they had to participate in treatments they did not agree with. They considered debriefings to be helpful in dealing with emotions. Thorough planning, good communication, pain relief, and the creation of a peaceful environment were perceived as important elements in achieving a dignified treatment withdrawal process.

Because of high mortality, end-of-life care is an important component of intensive care. We evaluated the effectiveness of a quality-improvement intervention to improve intensive care unit (ICU) end-of-life care. We conducted a cluster-randomized trial randomizing 12 hospitals. The intervention targeted clinicians with five components: clinician education, local champions, academic detailing, clinician feedback of quality data, and system supports. Outcomes were assessed for patients dying in the ICU or within 30 hours of ICU discharge using surveys and medical record review. Families completed Quality of Dying and Death (QODD) and satisfaction surveys. Nurses completed the QODD. Data were collected during baseline and follow-up at each hospital (May 2004 to February 2008). We used robust regression models to test for intervention effects, controlling for site, patient, family, and nurse characteristics. All hospitals completed the trial with 2,318 eligible patients and target sample sizes obtained for family and nurse surveys. The primary outcome, family-QODD, showed no change with the intervention (P = 0.33). There was no change in family satisfaction (P = 0.66) or nurse-QODD (P = 0.81). There was a nonsignificant increase in ICU days before death after the intervention (hazard ratio = 0.9; P = 0.07). Among patients undergoing withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, there was no change in time from admission to withdrawal (hazard ratio = 1.0; P = 0.81). We found this intervention was associated with no improvement in quality of dying and no change in ICU length of stay before death or time from ICU admission to withdrawal of life-sustaining measures. Improving ICU end-of-life care will require interventions with more direct contact with patients and families. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00685893).

Background Large intracerebral hemorrhages (ICHs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Patient transfer to higher level centers is common, but care in these centers rarely demonstrably improves morbidity or reduces mortality. Patients may rapidly progress to brain death, but a large number die shortly after transferring because of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WOLST). This outcome may result in poor resource use and unnecessary cost to patients, families, and institutions. We sought to determine clinical and radiographic predictors of early death or WOLST that may alter potential transfer. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients admitted from outside medical centers to the neurosciences intensive care unit at Saint Marys Mayo Clinic Hospital in Rochester, MN, from January 2014 to December 2019. Patients ≥ 18 years old with a spontaneous ICH were included. Exclusion criteria included trauma, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and subdural hematoma. We identified patients who died or underwent WOLST within 24 h of transfer. Descriptive characteristics of patients and ICH were collected. Data were analyzed with univariable, multivariable, and logistic regression. Predictive modeling was performed. An additional case-matched study was completed to evaluate for characteristics further. Results A total of 317 consecutive patients were identified. Forty-two patients were found with early death or WOLST within 24 h of transfer. Do not resuscitate/do not intubate (DNR/DNI) code status (odds ratio [OR] 5.23, confidence interval [CI] 3.31–8.28), anticoagulation use (OR 2.11, CI 1.09–4.09), and lower level of consciousness at presentation based on Glasgow Coma Score (OR 1.41, CI 1.29–1.54) and Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score (OR 1.34, CI 1.26–1.46) were associated with WOLST. Associated characteristics on the computed tomography scan included midline shift (OR 4.64, CI 2.32–9.29), hydrocephalus (OR 9.30, CI 4.56–18.96), and intraventricular extension (OR 5.27, CI 2.60–10.68). Case matching restricted to midline shift demonstrated similarity between patients with aggressive care and WOLST. DNR/DNI code status, warfarin use, ICH score, and composite FOUR score were the best predictive characteristics (area under the curve 0.942). Conclusions Early death or WOLST after ICH within 24 h of presentation was most associated with DNR/DNI code status, warfarin use, ICH score, and lower level of consciousness at presentation. These characteristics may be used by clinicians to guide conversations prior to transfer to tertiary care centers.

This paper develops a philosophical account of moral disruption. According to Robert Baker, moral disruption is a process in which technological innovations undermine established moral norms without clearly leading to a new set of norms. Here I analyze this process in terms of moral uncertainty, formulating a philosophical account with two variants. On the harm account, such uncertainty is always harmful because it blocks our knowledge of our own and others’ moral obligations. On the qualified harm account, there is no harm in cases where moral uncertainty is related to innovation that is “for the best” in historical perspective or where uncertainty is the expression of a deliberative virtue. The two accounts are compared by applying them to Baker’s historical case of the introduction of mechanical ventilation and organ transplantation technologies, as well as the present-day case of mass data practices in the health domain.

Since the early 1980s, case fatality of patients with ARDS has decreased, and explanations are unclear Using identical definitions of ARDS and organ failure, we analyzed consecutive cohorts of patients meeting syndrome criteria at our institution in 1982 (n = 46), 1990 (n = 112), 1994 (n = 99), and 1998 (n = 205) to determine causes and timing of death Overall case fatality has decreased from 68% in 1981–1982 to a low of 29% in 1996, plateauing since the mid-1990s (p = 0.001 for trend). Sepsis syndrome with multiple organ failure remains the most common cause of death (30 to 50%), while respiratory failure causes a small percentage (13 to 19%) of deaths. The distribution of causes of death has not changed over time. There was no change in the timing of death during the study periods: 26 to 44% of deaths occurred early (< 72 h after ARDS onset), and 56 to 74% occurred late (> 72 h after ARDS onset). However, the increased survival over the past 2 decades is entirely accounted for by patients who present with trauma and other risk factors for their ARDS, while survival for those patients whose risk factor is sepsis has not changed. Additionally, withdrawal of life support in these patients is now occurring at our institution significantly more frequently than in the past, and median time until death has decreased in patients who have support withdrawn While these results do not explain the overall case fatality decline in ARDS, they do indicate that sepsis syndrome remains the leading cause of death and suggest that future therapies to improve survival be targeted at reducing the complications of sepsis

Most deaths in the intensive care unit (ICU) involve withholding or withdrawing multiple life-sustaining therapies, but little is known about how to proceed practically and how this process affects family satisfaction. To examine the duration of life-support withdrawal and its association with overall family satisfaction with care in the ICU. We studied family members of 584 patients who died in an ICU at 1 of 14 hospitals after withdrawal of life support and for whom complete medical chart and family questionnaires were available. Data concerning six life-sustaining interventions administered during the last 5 days of life were collected. Families were asked to rate their satisfaction with care using the Family Satisfaction in the ICU questionnaire. For nearly half of the patients (271/584), withdrawal of all life-sustaining interventions took more than 1 day. Patients with a prolonged (>1 d) life-support withdrawal were younger, stayed longer in the ICU, had more life-sustaining interventions, had less often a diagnosis of cancer, and had more decision makers involved. Among patients with longer ICU stays, a longer duration in life-support withdrawal was associated with an increase in family satisfaction with care (P = 0.037). Extubation before death was associated with higher family satisfaction with care (P = 0.009). Withdrawal of life support is a complex process that depends on patient and family characteristics. Stuttering withdrawal is a frequent phenomenon that seems to be associated with family satisfaction. Extubation before death should be encouraged if possible.

Background & objectives: In developing countries like India, there is a lack of clarity regarding the factors that influence decisions pertaining to life supports at the end-of-life (EOL). The objectives of this study were to assess the factors associated with EOL-care decisions in the Indian context and to raise awareness in this area of healthcare. Methods: This retrospectively study included all patients admitted to the medical unit of a tertiary care hospital in southern India, over one year and died. The baseline demographics, economic, physiological, sociological, prognostic and medical treatment-related factors were retrieved from the patient's medical records and analysed. Results: Of the 122 decedents included in the study whose characteristics were analyzed, 41 (33.6%) received full life support and 81 (66.4%) had withdrawal or withholding of some life support measure. Amongst those who had withdrawal or withholding of life support, 62 (76.5%) had some support withheld and in 19 (23.5%), it was withdrawn. The documentation of the disease process, prognosis and the mention of imminent death in the medical records was the single most important factor that was associated with the EOL decision (odds ratio - 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.74; P=0.03). Interpretation & conclusions: The documentation of poor prognosis was the only factor found to be associated with EOL care decisions in our study. Prospective, multicentric studies need to be done to evaluate the influence of various other factors on the EOL care.

Increasingly in the United States and other countries, medical decisions, including those at the end of life, are made using a shared decision-making model. Under this model, physicians and other clinicians help patients clarify their values and reach consensus about treatment courses consistent with them. Because most critically ill patients are decisionally impaired, family members and other surrogates must make end-of-life decisions for them, ideally in accord with a substituted judgment standard. Physicians generally make decisions for patients who lack families or other surrogates and have no advance directives, based on a best interests standard and occasionally in consultation with other physicians or with review by a hospital ethics committee. End-of-life decisions for patients with surrogates usually are made at family conferences, the functioning of which can be improved by several methods that have been demonstrated to improve communications. Facilitative ethics consultations can be helpful in resolving conflicts when physicians and families disagree in end-of-life decisions. Ethics committees actually are allowed to make such decisions in one state when disagreements cannot be resolved otherwise.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is a valuable option for the procurement of organs for transplantation. In Italy, organ procurement after controlled DCD is legally and ethically conceivable within the current legislative framework. However, although formal impediments do not exist, the health care team is faced with many obstacles that may hinder the implementation of such programs. We report the case of Italy's first controlled DCD, specifically discussing the role of the patient's family in the shared decision-making process. In our case, the death of the patient subsequent to the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies was consistent with the patient's wishes, showing respect for his dignity and honoring his autonomy, as expressed to his family previously. By making donation possible, the medical team was able to fulfill the family's last request on behalf of the patient. This case should stimulate deliberation regarding the potential to shorten the 20-minute no-touch period currently in place in Italy. Such an action would not have injured this patient and would certainly have increased the quality of the procured organs.