Context While the adoption of practice guidelines is standardizing many aspects of patient care, ethical dilemmas are occurring because of forgoing life-sustaining therapies in intensive care and are dealt with in diverse ways between different countries and cultures. Objectives To determine the frequency and types of actual end-of-life practices in European intensive care units (ICUs) and to analyze the similarities and differences. Design and Setting A prospective, observational study of European ICUs. Participants Consecutive patients who died or had any limitation of therapy. Intervention Prospectively defined end-of-life practices in 37 ICUs in 17 European countries were studied from January 1, 1999, to June 30, 2000. Main Outcome Measures Comparison and analysis of the frequencies and patterns of end-of-life care by geographic regions and different patients and professionals. Results Of 31417 patients admitted to ICUs, 4248 patients (13.5%) died or had a limitation of life-sustaining therapy. Of these, 3086 patients (72.6%) had limitations of treatments (10% of admissions). Substantial intercountry variability was found in the limitations and the manner of dying: unsuccessful cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 20% (range, 5%-48%), brain death in 8% (range, 0%-15%), withholding therapy in 38% (range, 16%-70%), withdrawing therapy in 33% (range, 5%-69%), and active shortening of the dying process in 2% (range, 0%-19%). Shortening of the dying process was reported in 7 countries. Doses of opioids and benzodiazepines reported for shortening of the dying process were in the same range as those used for symptom relief in previous studies. Limitation of therapy vs continuation of life-sustaining therapy was associated with patient age, acute and chronic diagnoses, number of days in ICU, region, and religion (P<.001). Conclusion The limiting of life-sustaining treatment in European ICUs is common and variable. Limitations were associated with patient age, diagnoses, ICU stay, and geographic and religious factors. Although shortening of the dying process is rare, clarity between withdrawing therapies and shortening of the dying process and between therapies intended to relieve pain and suffering and those intended to shorten the dying process may be lacking.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/197049/JCE20061.pdf

End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study.

The jurors identified numerous problems with end of life in the ICU including variability in practice, inadequate predictive models for death, elusive knowledge of patient preferences, poor communication between staff and surrogates, insufficient or absent training of health-care providers, the use of imprecise and insensitive terminology, and incomplete documentation in the medical records. The jury strongly recommends that research be conducted to improve end-of-life care. The jury advocates a “shared” approach to end-of-life decision-making involving the caregiver team and patient surrogates. Respect for patient autonomy and the intention to honour decisions to decline unwanted treatments should be conveyed to the family. The process is one of negotiation, and the outcome will be determined by the personalities and beliefs of the participants. Ultimately, it is the attending physician’s responsibility, as leader of the health-care team, to decide on the reasonableness of the planned action. In the event of conflict, the ICU team may agree to continue support for a predetermined time. Most conflicts can be resolved. If the conflict persists, however, an ethics consultation may be helpful. Nurses must be involved in the process. The patient must be assured of a pain-free death. The jury of the Consensus Conference subscribes to the moral and legal principles that prohibit administering treatments specifically designed to hasten death. The patient must be given sufficient analgesia to alleviate pain and distress; if such analgesia hastens death, this “double effect” should not detract from the primary aim to ensure comfort.

/pdf/challenges-in-end-of-life-care-in-the-icu-7q1zeb21ey.pdf

Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU

Objective:Family members of critically ill patients report dissatisfaction with family-clinician communication about withdrawing life support, yet limited data exist to guide clinicians in this communication. The hypothesis of this analysis was that increased proportion of family speech during ICU f

Family satisfaction with family conferences about end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: increased proportion of family speech is associated with increased satisfaction.

Background In critically ill patients who are receiving mechanical ventilation, the factors associated with physicians' decisions to withdraw ventilation in anticipation of death are unclear. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical determinants that were associated with the withdrawal of mechanical ventilation. Methods We studied adults who were receiving mechanical ventilation in 15 intensive care units, recording base-line physiological characteristics, daily Multiple Organ Dysfunction Scores, the patient's decision-making ability, the type of life support administered, the use of do-not-resuscitate orders, the physician's prediction of the patient's status, and the physician's perceptions of the patient's preferences about the use of life support. We examined the relation between these factors and withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, using Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis. Results Of 851 patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation, 539 (63.3 percent) were successfully weaned, 146 (17.2 percent) died while receiving mechanical ventilation, and 166 (19.5 percent) had mechanical ventilation withdrawn. The need for inotropes or vasopressors was associated with withdrawal of the ventilator (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.20 to 2.66; P=0.004), as were the physician's prediction that the patient's likelihood of survival in the intensive care unit was less than 10 percent (hazard ratio, 3.49; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.39 to 8.79; P=0.002), the physician's prediction that future cognitive function would be severely impaired (hazard ratio, 2.51; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.28 to 4.94; P=0.04), and the physician's perception that the patient did not want life support used (hazard ratio, 4.19; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.57 to 6.81; P Conclusions Rather than age or the severity of the illness and organ dysfunction, the strongest determinants of the withdrawal of ventilation in critically ill patients were the physician's perception that the patient preferred not to use life support, the physician's predictions of a low likelihood of survival in the intensive care unit and a high likelihood of poor cognitive function, and the use of inotropes or vasopressors.

/pdf/withdrawal-of-mechanical-ventilation-in-anticipation-of-1zhwez6xkt.pdf

Withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in anticipation of death in the intensive care unit.

Background: Improved communication with family members of critically ill patients can decrease the prolongation of dying in the intensive care unit (ICU), but few data exist to guide the conduct of this communication. Objective: Our objective was to identify missed opportunities for physicians to provide support for or information to family during family conferences. Methods: We identified ICU family conferences in four hospitals that included discussions about withdrawing life support or delivery of bad news. Fifty-one conferences were audiotaped, including 214 family members. Thirty-six physicians led the conferences and some physicians led more than one. We used qualitative methods to identify and categorize missed opportunities, defined as an occurrence when the physician had an opportunity to provide support or information to the family and did not. Main results: Fifteen family conferences (29%) had missed opportunities identified. These fell into three categories: opportunities to listen and respond...

https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1164/rccm.200409-1267OC

Missed opportunities during family conferences about end-of-life care in the intensive care unit.

Objective: To determine how frequently life support is withheld or withdrawn from adult critically ill patients, and how physicians and patients families agree on the decision regarding the limitation of life support. Design: Prospective multi-centre cohort study. Setting: Six adult medical-surgical Spanish intensive care units (ICUs). Patients and participants: Three thousand four hundred ninety-eight consecutive patients admitted to six ICUs were enrolled. Measurements and results: Data collected included age, sex, SAPS II score on admission and within 24 h of the decision to limit treatment, length of ICU stay, outcome at ICU discharge, cause and mode of death, time to death after the decision to withhold or withdraw life support, consultation and agreement with patient's family regarding withholding or withdrawal, and the modalities of therapies withdrawn or withheld. Two hundred twenty-six (6.6%) of 3,498 patients had therapy withheld or withdrawn and 221 of them died in the ICU. Age, SAPS II and length of ICU stay were significantly higher in patients dying patients who had therapy withheld or withdrawn than in patients dying despite active treatment. The proposal to withhold or withdraw life support was initiated by physicians in 210 (92.9%) of 226 patients and by the family in the remaining cases. The patient's family was not involved in the decision to withhold or withdraw life support therapy in 64 (28.3%) of 226 cases. Only 21 (9%) patients had expressed their wish to decline life-prolonging therapy prior to ICU admission. Conclusions: The withholding and withdrawing of treatment was frequent in critically ill patients and was initiated primarily by physicians.

Juan Alcalá-Zamora

Papers

Withdrawing and withholding life support in the intensive care unit: a Spanish prospective multi-centre observational study