Crit Care Med. 1994 Feb;22(2):358-62. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199402000-00031.
To determine critical care practitioners' attitudes about the importance of various factors in decisions to use intensive care, including age, prognosis, quality of life, patient preference, and medical condition.
Cohort study.
The Annual Educational and Scientific Symposium of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
Participants at the symposium.
A self-administered questionnaire was distributed and 600 (52%) of 1,148 registrants attending the symposium responded. Eighty-four percent of respondents were physicians and 11% were nurses. Physicians were internists (30%), surgeons (24%), pediatricians (22%), and anesthesiologists (19%); 58% were in academic practices. Very few respondents believed that age should be a criterion for limiting intensive care (12%). Quality of life as viewed by the patient, probability of surviving hospitalization, reversibility of the acute disorder, and nature of the chronic disorder were the factors that most respondents considered to be important in decisions to admit to the intensive care unit. The patient's social worth, previous psychiatric history, cost-benefit analysis, and cost to society were the factors most respondents considered of little importance. Over 40% of respondents would admit patients with a chronic vegetative state or a patient with metastatic carcinoma and a superimposed, life-threatening event.
These results suggest that critical care providers, who must occasionally face difficult decisions about how to distribute limited resources among patients with competing needs, were not often inclined, at the time of this survey, to make choices based on estimates of who might benefit most. These critical care physicians' attitudes about triage may not support the optimal use of critical care resources.
确定重症监护从业者对于在决定是否使用重症监护时各种因素重要性的态度,这些因素包括年龄、预后、生活质量、患者偏好和医疗状况。
队列研究。
危重病医学学会年度教育和科学研讨会。
研讨会参与者。
发放了一份自填式问卷,1148名参加研讨会的注册者中有600人(52%)回复。84%的回复者为医生,11%为护士。医生包括内科医生(30%)、外科医生(24%)、儿科医生(22%)和麻醉医生(19%);58%在学术机构工作。很少有回复者认为年龄应作为限制重症监护的标准(12%)。患者视角的生活质量、住院存活概率、急性疾病的可逆性以及慢性疾病的性质是大多数回复者认为在决定收入重症监护病房时重要的因素。患者的社会价值、既往精神病史、成本效益分析以及对社会的成本是大多数回复者认为不太重要的因素。超过40%的回复者会收治处于慢性植物状态的患者或患有转移性癌且并发危及生命事件的患者。
这些结果表明,重症监护提供者在调查时并不倾向于根据谁可能受益最大的估计来做出选择,而他们有时必须面对如何在有相互竞争需求的患者中分配有限资源这一艰难决策。这些重症监护医生对于分诊的态度可能不利于重症监护资源的最佳利用。