Groselj Urh, Orazem Miha, Kanic Maja, Vidmar Gaj, Grosek Stefan
Department of Pediatric Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases, University Children's Hospital, UMC Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Med Sci Monit. 2014 Oct 21;20:2007-12. doi: 10.12659/MSM.891029.
Advances in intensive care medicine have enormously improved ability to successfully treat seriously ill patients. However, intensive treatment and prolongation of life is not always in the patient's best interest, and many ethical dilemmas arise in end-of-life (EOL) situations. We aimed to assess intensive care unit (ICU) physicians' experiences with EOL decision making and to compare the responses according to ICU type.
A cross-sectional survey was performed in all 35 Slovene ICUs, using a questionnaire designed to assess ICU physician experiences with EOL decision making, focusing on limitations of life-sustaining treatments (LST).
We distributed 370 questionnaires (approximating the number of Slovene ICU physicians) and 267 were returned (72% response rate). The great majority of ICU physicians reported using do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders (97%), withholding LST (94%), and withdrawing antibiotics (86%) or inotropes (95%). Fewer ICU physicians reported withdrawing mechanical ventilation (52%) or extubating patients (27%). Hydration was reported to be only rarely terminated (76% of participants reported never terminating it). In addition, 63% of participants had never encountered advance directives, and 39% reported to "never" or "rarely" participating in decision making with relatives of patients. Nurses were reported to be "never" or "rarely" involved in the EOL decision making process by 84% of participants.
Limitation of LST was regularly used by Slovene ICU physicians. DNR orders and withholding of LST were the most commonly used measures. Hydration was only rarely terminated. In addition, use of advance directives was almost non-existent in practice, and the patients' relatives and nurses only infrequently participated in the decision making.
重症监护医学的进步极大地提高了成功治疗重症患者的能力。然而,强化治疗和延长生命并不总是符合患者的最大利益,并且在临终(EOL)情况下会出现许多伦理困境。我们旨在评估重症监护病房(ICU)医生在临终决策方面的经验,并根据ICU类型比较其反应。
在斯洛文尼亚所有35个ICU中进行了一项横断面调查,使用一份旨在评估ICU医生临终决策经验的问卷,重点关注维持生命治疗(LST)的局限性。
我们分发了370份问卷(接近斯洛文尼亚ICU医生的数量),回收了267份(回复率为72%)。绝大多数ICU医生报告使用了不进行心肺复苏(DNR)医嘱(97%)、停止LST(94%)以及停用抗生素(86%)或血管活性药物(95%)。较少的ICU医生报告停用机械通气(52%)或为患者拔管(27%)。据报告,很少终止补液(76%的参与者报告从未终止过)。此外,63%的参与者从未遇到过预先指示,39%的参与者报告“从不”或“很少”与患者亲属共同参与决策。84%的参与者报告护士“从不”或“很少”参与临终决策过程。
斯洛文尼亚ICU医生经常使用LST的限制措施。DNR医嘱和停止LST是最常用的措施。补液很少被终止。此外,在实践中几乎不存在预先指示的使用情况,患者亲属和护士很少参与决策。