Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU: statement of the 5th International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003: executive summary

A history of ethics and law in the intensive care unit

Because they provide potential benefit at great personal and public cost, the intensive care unit (ICU) and the interventions rendered therein have become symbols of both the promise and the limitations of medical technology. At the same time, the ICU has served as an arena in which many of the ethical and legal dilemmas created by that technology have been defined and debated. This article outlines major events in the history of ethics and law in the ICU, covering the evolution of ICUs, ethical principles, informed consent and the law, medical decision-making, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining therapy, legal cases involving life support, advance directives, prognostication, and futility and the allocation of medical resources. Advancement of the ethical principle of respect for patient autonomy in ICUs increasingly is in conflict with physicians' concern about their own prerogatives and with the just distribution of medical resources.

Hope, truth, and preparing for death: perspectives of surrogate decision makers

BACKGROUND

Although many physicians worry that openly discussing a poor prognosis will cause patients and families to lose hope, surrogate decision makers' perspectives on this topic are largely unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine surrogate decision makers' attitudes toward balancing hope and telling the truth when discussing prognosis.

DESIGN

Prospective, mixed-methods cohort study.

SETTING

4 intensive care units at the University of California, San Francisco, Medical Center, San Francisco, California.

PARTICIPANTS

179 surrogate decision makers for incapacitated patients at high risk for death.

MEASUREMENTS

One-on-one, semistructured interviews with surrogates were conducted on the patients' 5th day of receiving mechanical ventilation. Constant comparative methods were used to inductively develop a framework to describe participants' responses. Validation methods included multidisciplinary analysis and member checking.

RESULTS

Overall, 93% (166 of 179) of surrogates felt that avoiding discussions about prognosis is an unacceptable way to maintain hope. The main explanatory theme was that timely discussion of prognosis is essential to allow family members to prepare emotionally and logistically for the possibility of a patient's death. Other themes that emerged included surrogates' belief that an accurate understanding of a patient's prognosis allows them to better support the patient and each other, a moral aversion to the idea of false hope, the perception that physicians have an obligation to discuss prognosis, and the notion that some surrogates look to physicians primarily for truth and seek hope elsewhere. A few surrogates (6 of 179) felt that physicians should withhold prognostic information because of a belief that discussing death could be emotionally damaging to the family or could negatively affect the patient's health.

LIMITATION

The authors did not longitudinally assess whether early disclosure about prognosis predicts fewer adverse bereavement outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Most surrogates of critically ill patients do not view withholding prognostic information as an acceptable way to maintain hope, largely because timely discussions about prognosis help families begin to prepare emotionally, existentially, and practically for the possibility that a patient will die.

Assessment of implementation of an order protocol for end-of-life symptom management

OBJECTIVES

Designing comfort care plans to treat symptoms at the end-of-life in the hospital is challenging. We evaluated the implementation of an inpatient end-of-life symptom management order (ESMO) protocol that guides the use of opiate medications and other modalities to provide palliation.

METHODS

Physicians and nurses caring for patients using the ESMO protocol were surveyed about care provided and their experiences.

RESULTS

Over 342 days, 127 patients (2.6 per week) were treated using the ESMO protocol and we surveyed a nurse and/or physician for 105 (83%) patients. Most patients were comatose, obtunded/stuperous, or disoriented when the ESMO protocol was initiated and most had a life expectancy of less than 1 day. One fourth of physicians felt that the protocol was instituted too late, principally citing family unwillingness to reorient toward comfort care. Providers reported that opiates were titrated appropriately, although a minority revealed discomfort with end-of-life opiate use. Nearly all clinicians found the ESMO protocol to be valuable.

CONCLUSIONS

A standardized protocol is a useful, but not fully sufficient, step toward improving care for dying hospitalized patients.

The language of prognostication in intensive care units

Rationale. Although misunderstandings about prognosis are common in intensive care units (ICUs), little is known about how physicians actually communicate prognostic information.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to 1) develop a framework to describe the language physicians use to disclose prognosis, 2) determine whether physicians frame prognostic statements as estimates for populations or estimates for individual patients, and 3) determine whether physicians use the recommended ''ask-tell-ask'' approach when discussing prognosis.

METHODS

The authors conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study of 51 audiotaped physician-family conferences about life support decisions in ICUs. They identified each prognostic statement and used grounded theory methods to develop a framework to understand the language physicians use to communicate prognosis.

MAIN RESULTS

Physicians prognosticated in 50 of 51 conferences. When discussing prognosis, physicians used qualitative probability statements in 72% (36/50) of conferences, numeric statements in 20% (10/50), absolute statements in 13% (4/32), and nonprobabilistic statements in 40% (20/50). Physicians exclusively used population-based language in 10% (5/50) of conferences, single-event probability statements in 62% (31/50), and both in 28% (14/ 50). In only 2% (1/50) of conferences did physicians ask whether the family wished to hear prognostic information prior to discussing it, and in only 14% of conferences (7/50) did physicians check to verify that families understood the prognostic information.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variability in the language used by physicians to disclose prognosis, with only 20% of physicians using quantitative terms. Very few physicians checked whether families understood prognostic information. These findings may provide potential targets for interventions to improve communication about prognosis in ICUs.

The right to pain treatment: a reminder for nurses

Critical care units are frequently the setting for the delivery of end-of-life care. A case study describing pain management for a terminally ill woman in an intensive care unit is used to illustrate conflicts that may be experienced by critical care nurses. The application of standards of professional organizations and regulatory bodies is described, as well as the ethical principles of autonomy, veracity, beneficence, nonmalfeasance, and double effect. Important legal and sociocultural considerations are included.

Doubt and belief in physicians' ability to prognosticate during critical illness: the perspective of surrogate decision makers

OBJECTIVES

Although discussing a prognosis is a duty of physicians caring for critically ill patients, little is known about surrogate decision-makers' beliefs about physicians' ability to prognosticate. We sought to determine: 1) surrogates' beliefs about whether physicians can accurately prognosticate for critically ill patients; and 2) how individuals use prognostic information in their role as surrogate decision-makers.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS

Multicenter study in intensive care units of a public hospital, a tertiary care hospital, and a veterans' hospital. We conducted semistructured interviews with 50 surrogate decision-makers of critically ill patients. We analyzed the interview transcripts using grounded theory methods to inductively develop a framework to describe surrogates' beliefs about physicians' ability to prognosticate. Validation methods included triangulation by multidisciplinary analysis and member checking.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Overall, 88% (44 of 50) of surrogates expressed doubt about physicians' ability to prognosticate for critically ill patients. Four distinct themes emerged that explained surrogates' doubts about prognostic accuracy: a belief that God could alter the course of the illness, a belief that predicting the future is inherently uncertain, prior experiences where physicians' prognostications were inaccurate, and experiences with prognostication during the patient's intensive care unit stay. Participants also identified several factors that led to belief in physicians' prognostications, such as receiving similar prognostic estimates from multiple physicians and prior experiences with accurate prognostication. Surrogates' doubts about prognostic accuracy did not prevent them from wanting prognostic information. Instead, most surrogate decision-makers view physicians' prognostications as rough estimates that are valuable in informing decisions, but are not determinative. Surrogates identified the act of prognostic disclosure as a key step in preparing emotionally and practically for the possibility that a patient may not survive.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many surrogate decision-makers harbor some doubt about the accuracy of physicians' prognostications, they highly value discussions about prognosis and use the information for multiple purposes.

Acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease after cardiac surgery

Kidney dysfunction is common after cardiac surgery and predicts mortality risk and poorer long-term outcome, particularly when acute injury superimposes upon chronic kidney disease. Numerous insults contribute to perioperative renal impairment including major surgical trespass, procedure-specific interventions (eg, deep hypothermic circulatory arrest), and postoperative complications. Regardless of cause, evidence supports a role for renal impairment and accumulation of "uremic toxins" as direct contributors to adverse outcome. No one has yet characterized a loss of renal function small enough to be insignificant. Despite considerable research focus, progress in development of interventions aimed at perioperative renoprotection has been disappointing. However, practice modifications can influence the likelihood of acute kidney injury, and several recent advances provide hope for the future. We review pathophysiologic understanding of this disorder; evaluate the confusing relationship (causal v epiphenomena) among acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and adverse outcome after cardiac surgery; and provide an evidence-based assessment of the conduct of cardiac surgery and renoprotection strategies.

Late-life cardiac interventions and the treatment imperative

The treatment imperative, say the authors, refers to the almost inexorable momentum towards intervention that is experienced by physicians, patients, and family members alike.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004.

DESIGN

Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding.

METHODS

We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B).

CONCLUSIONS

There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Evaluation of the effect of intensity of care on mortality after traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of age on intensity of care provided to traumatically brain-injured adults and to determine the influence of intensity of care on mortality at discharge and 12 months postinjury, controlling for injury severity.

DESIGN

Cohort study using the National Study on the Costs and Outcomes of Trauma (NSCOT) database. Risk ratio and Poisson regression analyses were performed using data weighted according to the population of eligible patients.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

A total of 18 level 1 and 51 level 2 non-trauma centers located in 14 states in the United States and 1,776 adults aged 25-84 yrs with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury.

MEASUREMENTS

Injury severity was determined by the motor component of the Glasgow Coma Scale score, the Injury Severity Score, pupillary reactivity, and presence of midline shift. Factors evaluated as contributing to intensity of care included: admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, placement of an intracranial pressure monitor, placement of a jugular bulb catheter, placement of a pulmonary artery catheter, critical care consultation, the number of specialty care consultations, mannitol use, treatment with barbiturate coma, decompressive craniectomy, number of nonneurosurgical procedures performed, the presence of a do-not-resuscitate order, and withdrawal of therapy.

MAIN RESULTS

Controlling for injury-related factors, sex, and comorbidity, as age increased, the overall likelihood of receiving various interventions decreased. After controlling for injury severity, sex, and comorbidity, factors associated with higher risk of in-hospital death were: being aged 75-84 yrs (relative risk [RR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13, 1.55), pulmonary artery catheter use (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.30, 1.86), intubation (RR 4.17, 95% CI 2.28, 7.61), the presence of a do-not-resuscitate order (RR 3.21, 95% CI 2.21, 4.65), and withdrawal of therapy (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.69, 3.23). In contrast, a higher number of specialty care consultations (surgical consults: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54, 0.74; medical consults: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79, 0.95; and other consults: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26, 0.69) were associated with decreased risk of death. The results were similar for factors associated with death at 12 months, with the exception that the number of medical consultations was not significant, whereas the number of nonneurosurgical procedures performed was associated with lower risk of death (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92, 0.99), as was obtaining critical care consultation services (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71, 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lower intensity of care provided to older adults with traumatic brain injury. Although the specific contributions of specialists to patient management are unknown, their consultation was associated with decreased risk of in-hospital death and death within 12 months. It is important that careproviders have an increased awareness of the potential contribution of multidisciplinary clinical decision making to patient outcomes in older traumatically brain-injured patients.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock," published in 2004.

DESIGN

Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding.

METHODS

We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B).

CONCLUSION

There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Attitudes and behaviors of Japanese physicians concerning withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for end-of-life patients: results from an Internet survey

BACKGROUND

Evidence concerning how Japanese physicians think and behave in specific clinical situations that involve withholding or withdrawal of medical interventions for end-of-life or frail elderly patients is yet insufficient.

METHODS

To analyze decisions and actions concerning the withholding/withdrawal of life-support care by Japanese physicians, we conducted cross-sectional web-based internet survey presenting three scenarios involving an elderly comatose patient following a severe stroke. Volunteer physicians were recruited for the survey through mailing lists and medical journals. The respondents answered questions concerning attitudes and behaviors regarding decision-making for the withholding/withdrawal of life-support care, namely, the initiation/withdrawal of tube feeding and respirator attachment.

RESULTS

Of the 304 responses analyzed, a majority felt that tube feeding should be initiated in these scenarios. Only 18% felt that a respirator should be attached when the patient had severe pneumonia and respiratory failure. Over half the respondents felt that tube feeding should not be withdrawn when the coma extended beyond 6 months. Only 11% responded that they actually withdrew tube feeding. Half the respondents perceived tube feeding in such a patient as a "life-sustaining treatment," whereas the other half disagreed. Physicians seeking clinical ethics consultation supported the withdrawal of tube feeding (OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 2.5-16.3; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Physicians tend to harbor greater negative attitudes toward the withdrawal of life-support care than its withholding. On the other hand, they favor withholding invasive life-sustaining treatments such as the attachment of a respirator over less invasive and long-term treatments such as tube feeding. Discrepancies were demonstrated between attitudes and actual behaviors. Physicians may need systematic support for appropriate decision-making for end-of-life care.

[Limitation of therapeutic effort after ICU admission. Analysis of related factors]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the limitation of therapeutic effort (LTE) in our Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and the variables associated with that decision.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study with a follow up of one year after discharge.

SETTING

ICU of a second level hospital.

PATIENTS

Four hundred and nine patients admitted during a two-year period.

MAIN VARIABLES

APACHE II, NEMS, SOFA, quality of life (PAEEC) and mortality.

RESULTS

LTE was performed in 49 (12%) patients. This decision was made by general agreement among the care team in 88% of cases and with the family in 73.5%. It was made on day 8 (4-20) with a SOFA score of 9 (4-13). Mortality in the LTE group was 69.4% in ICU, 92% in hospital, and 96% at 6 and 12 months. A logistic regression model showed that the variables associated with LTE were the following: NEMS score >or=30.7 (OR 12; 95% CI 3.7-39, p < 0.001), NEMS 26.6-30.6 (OR 8; 95% CI 2.5-25.6, p = 0.001), APACHE II > 30 (OR 7.6; 95% CI 2-29, p = 0.003), quality of life >or= 7 (OR 4.2; 95% CI 1.1-15, p = 0.03), age >or= 80 (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4-9.5, p = 0.007) and medical patient condition (OR 3.5; 95% CI 1.5-8, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

LTE is a common practice and is usually performed among the care team and the patient's surrogates. The main variables associated with LSC are those related to the severity of illness, previous quality of life, medical disease and patient's age.

The pressure to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining therapy from critically ill patients in the United States

Physicians and nurses sometimes exert pressure on the families of critically ill patients to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining therapy from them. This pressure may stem from prognostic, professional, social, and economic factors. Although the pressure to limit life support may be appropriate in some circumstances, in others it is not justified. The pressure also may damage communications and cause resentment. If communications cannot be improved, and if the pressure cannot be relieved, a due process approach to conflict resolution that involves other parties may be required.

Noninvasive ventilation

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) is the delivery of mechanical-assisted breathing without placement of an artificial airway such as an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy. During the first half of 20th century, negative-pressure ventilation (iron lung) provided mechanical ventilatory assistance. By the 1960s, however, invasive (ie, by means of an endotracheal tube) positive-pressure ventilation superseded negative-pressure ventilation as the primarily mode of support for ICU patients because of its superior delivery of support and better airway protection. Over the past decade, the use of NPPV has been integrated into the treatment of many medical diseases, largely because the development of nasal ventilation. Nasal ventilation has the potential benefit of providing ventilatory assistance with greater convenience, comfort, safety, and less cost than invasive ventilation. NPPV is delivered by a tightly fitted mask or helmet that covers the nares, face, or head. NPPV is used in various clinical settings and is beneficial in many acute medical situations. This article explores the trends regarding the use of noninvasive ventilation. It also provides a current perspective on applications in patients with acute and chronic respiratory failure, neuromuscular disease, congestive heart failure, and sleep apnea. Additionally, it discusses the general guidelines for application, monitoring, and avoidance of complications for NPPV.

Prognostication during physician-family discussions about limiting life support in intensive care units

OBJECTIVE

Prognostic information is important to the family members of incapacitated, critically ill patients, yet little is known about what prognostic information physicians provide. Our objectives were to determine the types of prognostic information provided to families of critically ill patients when making major end-of-life treatment decisions and to identify factors associated with more physician prognostication.

DESIGN

Multiple-center, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

ICUs of four hospitals.

SUBJECTS

Thirty-five physicians, 51 patients, and 169 family members.

INTERVENTIONS

We audiotaped 51 physician-family conferences in which there were deliberations about major end-of-life treatment decisions at four hospitals in 2000-2002. Conferences were coded to identify the types of prognostic information provided by physicians. We used a mixed-effects regression model to identify factors associated with more prognostication by physicians.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The mean number of prognostic statements per conference was 9.4+/-6.4 (range 0-29). Eighty-six percent of conferences contained discussion of the patient's anticipated functional status or quality of life, compared with 63% in which the chances for survival were discussed (p=.01). There were significantly more statements about prognosis for functional outcomes per conference compared with statements about prognosis for survival (median 4 [interquartile range 2-8] vs. 1 [interquartile range 0-3]; p<.001). Increasing educational level of the family was independently associated with more prognostic statements by physicians (p<.001) as was the degree of physician-family conflict about withdrawing life support (p<.001) and the physician's race being white (p=.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostication occurred frequently during physician-family deliberations about whether to forego life support, but physicians did not discuss the patient's prognosis for survival in more than one third of conferences. Less educated families received less information about prognosis. Future studies should address whether these observations partially explain the high prevalence of family misunderstandings about prognosis in intensive care units.

Acute kidney injury in critical care: time for a paradigm shift?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute alterations in renal function are commonly encountered in various settings with varied clinical manifestations ranging from a minimal elevation in serum creatinine to anuric renal failure. Our knowledge of human acute kidney injury has been fairly stagnant, until recently largely limited by a lack of concerted efforts in the field. This review summarizes the recent advances and provides an overview of emerging trends in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

One of the limitations in our knowledge of human acute kidney injury has been the lack of a standardized definition and staging criteria for this disorder. New information on the epidemiology and outcomes of acute kidney injury has emerged providing an opportunity to reappraise our approach to this disease. Also, there has been new work on the relationship of alterations of renal function to short and long-term outcomes, particularly mortality.

SUMMARY

To translate advances from basic research to clinical application a multidisciplinary approach is required. New research in the field of biomarkers combined with clinical markers will lead to therapies that can be introduced earlier in the course of the disease and, hopefully, lead to a decrease in mortality from this potentially reversible condition.

Clinical practice guidelines for support of the family in the patient-centered intensive care unit: American College of Critical Care Medicine Task Force 2004–2005

OBJECTIVE

To develop clinical practice guidelines for the support of the patient and family in the adult, pediatric, or neonatal patient-centered ICU.

PARTICIPANTS

A multidisciplinary task force of experts in critical care practice was convened from the membership of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) to include representation from adult, pediatric, and neonatal intensive care units.

EVIDENCE

The task force members reviewed the published literature. The Cochrane library, Cinahl, and MedLine were queried for articles published between 1980 and 2003. Studies were scored according to Cochrane methodology. Where evidence did not exist or was of a low level, consensus was derived from expert opinion.

CONSENSUS PROCESS

The topic was divided into subheadings: decision making, family coping, staff stress related to family interactions, cultural support, spiritual/religious support, family visitation, family presence on rounds, family presence at resuscitation, family environment of care, and palliative care. Each section was led by one task force member. Each section draft was reviewed by the group and debated until consensus was achieved. The draft document was reviewed by a committee of the Board of Regents of the ACCM. After steering committee approval, the draft was approved by the SCCM Council and was again subjected to peer review by this journal.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 300 related studies were reviewed. However, the level of evidence in most cases is at Cochrane level 4 or 5, indicating the need for further research. Forty-three recommendations are presented that include, but are not limited to, endorsement of a shared decision-making model, early and repeated care conferencing to reduce family stress and improve consistency in communication, honoring culturally appropriate requests for truth-telling and informed refusal, spiritual support, staff education and debriefing to minimize the impact of family interactions on staff health, family presence at both rounds and resuscitation, open flexible visitation, way-finding and family-friendly signage, and family support before, during, and after a death.

Psychometric characteristics of a quality of communication questionnaire assessing communication about end-of-life care

The importance of good clinician-patient communication to quality end-of-life care has been well documented yet there are no validated measures that allow patients to assess the quality of this communication. Using a sample of hospice patients (n = 83) and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n = 113), we evaluated the psychometric characteristics of a 13-item patient-centered, patient-report questionnaire about the quality of end-of-life communication (QOC). Our purpose was to explore the measurement structure of the QOC items to ascertain if the items represent unitary or multidimensional constructs and to describe the construct validity of the QOC score(s). Analyses included: principal component analyses to identify scales, internal consistency analyses to demonstrate reliability, and correlational and group comparisons to support construct validity. Findings support the construction of two scales: a six-item "general communication skills" scale and a seven-item, "communication about end-of-life care" scale. The two scales meet standards of scale measurement, including good factor convergence (values >or= 0.63) and discrimination (values different >or= 0.25), percent of variance explained (69.3%), and good internal consistency (alpha >or= 0.79). The scales' construct validity is supported by significant associations (p <or= 0.01) with items assessing overall quality of doctor communication and quality of care, number and type of end-of-life discussions, and doctor's awareness of patient's treatment preferences. The general communication skills scale correlates more strongly with the general communication items while the communication about end-of-life care scale correlates more strongly with items addressing end-of-life topics. While further validation studies are needed, this assessment of the QOC represents an important step toward providing a measure of the quality of end-of-life communication.

Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

INTRODUCTION

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI.

METHODS

Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results.

RESULTS

The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed.

CONCLUSION

We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.

Euthanasia: an overview and the jewish perspective

BACKGROUND

End-of-life care poses fundamental ethical problems to clinicians. Defining euthanasia is a difficult and complex task, which causes confusion in its practical clinical application. Over the course of history, abuse of the term has led to medical atrocities. Familiarity with the relevant bioethical issues and the development of practical guidelines might improve clinical performance.

OBJECTIVE

To define philosophical concepts, to present historical events, to discuss the relevant attitudes in modern bioethics and law that may be helpful in elaborating practical guidelines for clinicians regarding euthanasia and end-of-life care. Concepts found in the classic sources of Jewish tradition might shed additional light on the issue and help clinicians in their decision-making process.

METHODS

An historical overview defines the concepts of active versus passive euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide and related terms. Positions found in classical Jewish literature are presented and analyzed with their later interpretations. The relevance and application in modern clinical medicine of both the general and Jewish approaches are discussed.

RESULTS

The overview of current bioethical concepts demonstrates the variety of approaches in western culture and legal systems. Philosophically and conceptually, there is a crucial distinction between active and passive euthanasia. The legitimacy of active euthanasia has been the subject of major controversy in recent times in various countries and religious traditions.

CONCLUSION

The historical overview and the literature review demonstrate the need to provide clearer definitions of the concepts relating to euthanasia, for in the past the term has led to major confusion and uncontrolled abuse. Bioethical topics should, therefore, be included in medical training and continuing education. There are major debates and controversies regarding the current clinical and legal approaches. We trust that classical Jewish sources might contribute to the establishment of clinical definitions, meaningful approaches and practical guidelines for clinicians.

End-of-life care in the intensive care unit: State of the art in 2006

Evidence suggests that change is occurring in end-of-life care in the intensive care unit (ICU). There is a growing need and appreciation for the importance of education for the multidisciplinary team, but particularly for physicians, in gaining communication skills to improve the quality of end-of-life care and provide palliative care in the ICU. Studies have indicated that families are unhappy with the communication they receive when a family member is in the ICU. Evidence also suggests that families want to be involved in decisions about their loved one's care. Interventions have been tested in numerous ICUs that others can evaluate for application to their own facility in an attempt to create a global standard for end-of-life care in the ICU. Quality indicators have been defined, and an audit tool can help assess levels of performance.

Effect of ethics consultations in the intensive care unit

Although evidence-based research is limited, results suggest that ethics consultations are associated with reductions in hospital days and intensive care unit days and in life-sustaining treatments in those patients who ultimately will not survive to discharge. Furthermore, the majority of healthcare providers and patients/surrogates agreed that ethics consultations in the intensive care unit were helpful in addressing treatment conflicts. Ethics consultations also reduce hospital costs without diminishing the quality of care. Hence, ethics consultations seem to be useful in resolving conflicts that may be inappropriately prolonging nonbeneficial or unwanted treatments at the end of life. Further research on whether ethics consultations are beneficial in other settings is needed to establish the optimal scope of this intervention. Also, the benefits described above were achieved by highly skilled and experienced consultants. It is not certain, therefore, how successful other hospitals will be when adopting this intervention.

Factors Influencing Length of Stay in the Intensive Care Unit

• Background Long stays in the intensive care unit are associated with high costs and burdens on patients and patients’ families and in turn affect society at large. Although factors that affect length of stay and outcomes of care in the intensive care unit have been studied extensively, the conclusions reached have not been reviewed to determine whether they reveal an organizational pattern that might be of practical use in reducing length of stay in the unit.

• Objective To identify and categorize the factors associated with prolonged stays in the intensive care unit and to describe briefly the nonmedical interventions to date designed to reduce length of stay.

• Methods Articles published between January 1990 and March 2005 in English-language journals indexed by MEDLINE were searched for studies on outcomes and costs of care in the intensive care unit and on care at the end of life.

• Results The emerging consensus is that length of stay in the intensive care unit is exacerbated by several increasingly discernible medical, social, psychological, and institutional factors. At the same time, several nonmedical, experimental interventions have been designed to reduce length of stay.

• Conclusions Interventions involving palliative care, ethics consultations, and other methods to increase communication between healthcare personnel, patients, and patients’ families may be helpful in decreasing length of stay in the intensive care unit. Further studies are needed to provide a strategy for targeting specific risk factors indicated by the literature review.

Patient perspectives on management of pneumothorax in lymphangioleiomyomatosis

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The American College of Chest Physicians Delphi Consensus Statement on management of spontaneous pneumothorax recommended pleurodesis after the first secondary spontaneous pneumothorax to prevent recurrence, and evaluation of patients' perspectives regarding pneumothorax treatment was identified as a future research priority. Patients with lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) are an ideal population for performing these studies, since pneumothorax occurs and recurs more commonly in LAM than in any other chronic pulmonary disorder.

STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A 23-item questionnaire evaluating opinions of pneumothorax treatment was distributed to 615 patients in the LAM Foundation patient database, with a response rate of 52%.

RESULTS

Of respondents, 69% (216 of 314 patients) reported a history of radiographically documented pneumothorax, and 181 patients (84%) reported at least one pleurodesis procedure. Neither a history of pneumothorax nor surgical management of pneumothorax affected reported oxygen use or perception of overall lung function, yet 41% thought that their pneumothorax had contributed to a decline in lung function. Few patients (12%) worried frequently about a pneumothorax developing, but one third made lifestyle modifications due to fear of pneumothorax. Extensive pain associated with chest tube placement and inadequate pain management throughout treatment for pneumothorax were frequent concerns. Only 25% of respondents thought that pleurodesis was appropriate for a first pneumothorax, while 60% favored pleurodesis for a second pneumothorax. Despite the apparent reluctance to undergo pleurodesis, most patients agreed that pleurodesis helps prevent pneumothorax recurrence. One third of patients believed that their physicians did not consider their preferences regarding pneumothorax management.

CONCLUSIONS

LAM patients and physicians may have different views about the significance of pneumothorax, in that most patients appear to favor a conservative initial approach to pneumothorax management. In conjunction with appropriate pain management, a better understanding of patients' perspectives will facilitate cooperative decision making and may ultimately improve clinical outcomes in LAM related to pneumothorax.

Decision-making process, outcome, and 1-year quality of life of octogenarians referred for intensive care unit admission

OBJECTIVE

To describe triage decisions and subsequent outcomes in octogenarians referred to an ICU.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational study in the medical ICU in a tertiary nonuniversity hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Cohort of 180 patients aged 80 years or over who were triaged for admission.

MEASUREMENTS

Age, underlying diseases, admission diagnoses, Mortality Probability Model score, and mortality were recorded. Self-sufficiency (Katz Index of Activities of Daily Living) and quality of life (modified Perceived Quality of Life scale and Nottingham Health Profile) were measured 1year after triage.

RESULTS

In 132 patients (73.3%) ICU admission was refused, including 79 (43.8%) considered too sick to benefit. Factors independently associated with refusal were nonsurgical status, age older than 85 years, and full unit. Greater self-sufficiency was associated with ICU admission. Hospital mortality was 30/48 (62.5%), 56/79 (70.8%), 9/51 (17.6%), and 0/2 in the admitted, too sick to benefit, too well to benefit, and family/patient refusal groups, respectively; 1-year mortality was 34/48 (70.8%), 69/79 (87.3%), 24/51 (47%), and 0/2, respectively. Self-sufficiency was unchanged by ICU stay. Quality of life (known in only 28 patients) was significantly poorer for isolation, emotional, and mobility domains compared to the French general population matched on sex and age.

CONCLUSIONS

More than two-thirds of patients aged over 80 years referred to our ICU were denied admission. One year later self-sufficiency was not modified and quality of life was poorer than in the general population. These results indicate a need to discuss patient preferences before triage decisions.

Care at the end of life in critically ill patients: the European perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Care surrounding end-of-life has become a major topic in the intensive care medicine literature. Cultural and regional variations are associated with transatlantic debates about decisions to forego life-sustaining therapies and lead to recent international statements. The aim of this review is to provide insight into the decisions to forego life sustaining therapies and end-of-life care in Europe.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although decisions to forego life-sustaining therapies are increasingly made in European countries, frequency and characteristics of end-of-life care are still heterogeneous. Moreover, even though many determinants of these variations have been identified, epidemiologic and interventional studies still provide additional information. In agreement with public opinions, recent European laws have emphasized the patient's autonomy. In real life, advance care planning is rarely used. Decisions are often made by caregivers (physicians and nurses) or families, these latter being less involved than in North America. Not only ethic divergences between physicians but also cultural variations account for this disparity.

SUMMARY

To optimize end-of-life care in the intensive care unit, there is an urgent need for the development of palliative and multidisciplinary care in Europe. Furthermore, it highlights the need for culturally competent care, adapted to needs and values of every single patient and family. In addition, a lack of communication with families and within the medical team, an uninformed public about end-of-life issues, and insufficient training of intensive care unit staff are crucial barriers to end-of-life care development. Special awareness of professionals and innovative research are needed to promote a high-standard of end-of-life care in the intensive care unit.

Approach to the comatose patient

BACKGROUND

Coma is a medical emergency and may constitute a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for the intensivist.

OBJECTIVE

To review currently available data on the etiology, diagnosis, and outcome of coma. To propose an evidence-based approach for the clinical management of the comatose patient.

DATA SOURCE

Search of Medline and Cochrane databases; manual review of bibliographies from selected articles and monographs.

DATA SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Coma and other states of impaired consciousness are signs of extensive dysfunction or injury involving the brainstem, diencephalon, or cerebral cortex and are associated with a substantial risk of death and disability. Management of impaired consciousness includes prompt stabilization of vital physiologic functions to prevent secondary neurologic injury, etiological diagnosis, and the institution of brain-directed therapeutic or preventive measures. Neurologic prognosis is determined by the underlying etiology and may be predicted by the combination of clinical signs and electrophysiological tests.

Communication and end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: patient, family, and clinician outcomes

Even though good communication among clinicians, patients, and family members is identified as the most important factor in end-of-life care in ICUs, it is the least accomplished. According to accumulated evidence, communication about end-of-life decisions in ICUs is difficult and flawed. Poor communication leaves clinicians and family members stressed and dissatisfied, as well as patients' wishes neglected. Conflict and anger both among clinicians and between clinicians and family members also result. Physicians and nurses lack communication skills, an essential element to achieve better outcomes at end of life. There is an emerging evidence base that proactive, multidisciplinary strategies such as formal and informal family meetings, daily team consensus procedures, palliative care team case finding, and ethics consultation improve communication about end-of-life decisions. Evidence suggests that improving end-of-life communication in ICUs can improve the quality of care by resulting in earlier transition to palliative care for patients who ultimately do not survive and by increasing family and clinician satisfaction. Both larger, randomized controlled trials and mixed methods designs are needed in future work. In addition, research to improve clinician communication skills and to assess the effects of organizational and unit context and culture on end-of-life outcomes is essential.

Care near the end-of-life in critically ill patients: a North American perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

End-of-life care for critically ill patients has emerged as an area in which significant quality improvement is possible. In this article, we present a North American perspective on recent research and quality improvement initiatives in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some of the most important recent developments in end-of-life care in the intensive care unit concern physician-patient-family communication. There is consensus between North American and European professional societies that a shared approach to decision-making by physicians and family members is optimal. The shared decision approach demands that physicians not only skillfully elicit the patient's treatment preferences but also effectively inform the family of the patient's clinical condition and prognosis. Moreover, the ultimate responsibility for end-of-life treatment decisions is shared between the physician and the patient or family.

SUMMARY

This update presents a North American perspective on six topics of particular importance to end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: (a) The role of advance directives, (b) shared decision-making and the role of the family, (c) conflict and futility in the intensive care unit, (d) cultural aspects of end-of-life care, (e) multidisciplinary care in the intensive care unit, and (f) future directions for improving end-of-life care in the intensive care unit.

Critical care: why there is no global bioethics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The possibility of content-full, universal, bioethical norms is assessed. The literature brings into question a global bioethics. A salient moral and bioethical pluralism undermines the plausibility of imposing of uniform bioethical norms on critical care. Addressing the tension between the aspiration to a global bioethics and the presence of moral pluralism is timely, given the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's development of universal, bioethical norms. The practice of critical care in the 21st century will be influenced by the tension between bioethical pluralism and counter-assertions on behalf of a global bioethics.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing literature reflects a bioethical pluralism with significant implications for critical care. Much of the literature supporting pluralism is rooted in a reaction in the Pacific Rim against North American and Western European moral and philosophical commitments. These voices of moral dissent join an already salient moral diversity in the West regarding issues ranging from abortion to end-of-life decision-making, physician-assisted suicide, and euthanasia, as well as conflicting understandings of the bioethics of appropriate approaches to the allocation of scarce medical resources. This literature acknowledging bioethical diversity contrasts with announcements of universal bioethical norms.

SUMMARY

Clinicians need to appreciate the sources of moral controversy that divide them from their patients and from their colleagues and to recognize that moral and economic differences may lead to different standards of care. Taking bioethical diversity seriously supports focusing on procedural moral approaches that allow peaceable collaboration in the face of substantive moral disagreement.

Outcome measures for clinical research in sepsis: a report of the 2nd Cambridge Colloquium of the International Sepsis Forum

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sepsis is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality for patients admitted to an intensive care unit. The evaluation of new therapies has been hampered by the underdevelopment of outcome measures used to detect biological activity and patient-centered benefit in a complex and highly heterogeneous patient population. We sought to evaluate existing approaches and to draw on insights from other disciplines to propose a comprehensive approach to outcome evaluation in sepsis clinical trials.

METHODS

An expert colloquium organized by the International Sepsis Forum brought together sepsis researchers, clinical epidemiologists, and experts in the development and implementation of outcome measures in rheumatology, neurology, and oncology.

RESULTS

The translation of an evolving understanding of the biology of sepsis into effective new therapies for critically ill patients requires a reevaluation of the end points used to determine response to intervention. These represent a continuum that measures biological activity against the target at one end and sustained improvement in survival or quality of life at the other. Early phase research should determine whether an intervention works in vivo, using measures that are responsive and informative to provide proof of principle, to aid in selecting optimal patient populations for study, and to gain insights into optimal dose and duration of therapy. After in vivo biology has been demonstrated and the possibility of efficacy inferred by plausible improvements in surrogate physiologic measures, definitive studies should seek robust evidence of benefit using end points that measure important, patient-centered benefit, including intermediate and longer term survival and health-related quality of life. Nonmortal measures of benefit assume particular importance for populations, such as children, whose mortality risk is low, or who have significant rates of comorbidities that independently limit survival. Composite measures that integrate morbidity and mortality effects may provide the most meaningful information about therapeutic efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of explicit, hypothesis-driven, and iterative approaches to outcome measure development, patterned on approaches used in the fields of rheumatology and oncology, may improve the conduct of clinical studies in the critically ill.

Limitation and withdrawal of intensive therapy at the end of life: practices in intensive care units in Mumbai, India

OBJECTIVE

To describe the practices in intensive care units in Mumbai hospitals regarding limitation and withdrawal of care at the end of life.

DESIGN

Review of prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

Intensive care units of four major hospitals (two private tertiary referral general hospitals, one mixed public and private cancer referral hospital, and one large public hospital).

PATIENTS

Hospital and intensive care unit patients who died during the study period.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We measured the percentage of hospital deaths occurring inside and outside intensive care units and the incidence of withholding intubation, withholding other therapy, and withdrawing therapy for deaths in the intensive care unit. The proportion of hospital deaths that occurred in an intensive care unit was 14% in the cancer hospital, 23% in the public hospital, and 58-73% in the two private hospitals (chi-square test for trends, p < .0001). Of the 143 deaths that occurred in intensive care unit, limitation of care occurred in 49 patients. Twenty-five percent of these patients were not intubated terminally, 67% were initially intubated and ventilated but failed to recover and subsequently had no further escalation of therapy, and 8% had withdrawal of therapy. Therapy was limited in 19% of deaths in the public hospital intensive care unit (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.97) vs. 40%, 41%, and 50% of deaths in the other three intensive care units.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapy is limited in a significant proportion of intensive care unit patients. Significant differences in the practice of limitation of therapy exist between public and private hospitals. Lack of access to a limited number of intensive care unit beds, especially in the public hospital, may constitute implicit limitation of care.