Ethical content of expert recommendations for end-of-life decision-making in intensive care units: A systematic review

Assessing palliative care practices in intensive care units and interpreting them using the lens of appropriate care concepts. An umbrella review

PURPOSE

Intensive care units (ICUs) have significant palliative care needs but lack a reliable care framework. This umbrella review addresses them by synthesising palliative care practices provided at end-of-life to critically ill patients and their families before, during, and after ICU admission.

METHODS

Seven databases were systematically searched for systematic reviews, and the umbrella review was conducted according to the guidelines laid out by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI).

RESULTS

Out of 3122 initial records identified, 40 systematic reviews were included in the synthesis. Six key themes were generated that reflect the palliative and end-of-life care practices in the ICUs and their outcomes. Effective communication and accurate prognostications enabled families to make informed decisions, cope with uncertainty, ease distress, and shorten ICU stays. Inter-team discussions and agreement on a plan are essential before discussing care goals. Recording care preferences prevents unnecessary end-of-life treatments. Exceptional end-of-life care should include symptom management, family support, hydration and nutrition optimisation, avoidance of unhelpful treatments, and bereavement support. Evaluating end-of-life care quality is critical and can be accomplished by seeking family feedback or conducting a survey.

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review encapsulates current palliative care practices in ICUs, influencing patient and family outcomes and providing insights into developing an appropriate care framework for critically ill patients needing end-of-life care and their families.

Navigating the shadows: medical professionals' values and perspectives on end-of-life care within pediatric intensive care units in Croatia

Background and aim

This study explores healthcare professionals' perspectives on end-of-life care in pediatric intensive care units (ICUs) in Croatia, aiming to illuminate their experiences with such practices, underlying attitudes, and major decision-making considerations. Amid the high variability, complexity, and emotional intensity of pediatric end-of-life decisions and practices, understanding these perspectives is crucial for improving care and policies.

Methods

The study utilized a cross-sectional survey intended for physicians and nurses across all pediatric ICUs in Croatia. It included healthcare professionals from six neonatal and four pediatric ICUs in total. As the data from neonatal and pediatric ICUs were examined jointly, the term pediatric ICU was used to denominate both types of ICUs. A statistical analysis was performed using Python and JASP, focusing on professional roles, professional experience, and regional differences.

Results

The study included a total of 103 participants (with an overall response rate-in relation to the whole target population-of 48% for physicians and 29% for nurses). The survey revealed diverse attitudes toward and experiences with various aspects of end-of-life care, with a significant portion of healthcare professionals indicating infrequent involvement in life-sustaining treatment (LST) limitation discussions and decisions, as well as somewhat ambiguous attitudes regarding such practices. Notably, discrepancies emerged between different professional roles and, in particular, regions, underscoring the high variability of LST limitation-related procedures.

Conclusions

The findings highlight a pressing need for more straightforward guidelines, legal frameworks, support mechanisms, and communication strategies to navigate the complex terrain of rather burdensome end-of-life pediatric care, which is intrinsically loaded with profound ethical quandaries.

Palliative and end-of-life care practices for critically ill patients and their families in a peri-intensive care setting: A protocol for an umbrella review

OBJECTIVES

This umbrella review will summarize palliative and end-of-life care practices in peri-intensive care settings by reviewing systematic reviews in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. Evidence suggests that integrating palliative care into ICU management, initiating conversations about care goals, and providing psychological and emotional support can significantly enhance patient and family outcomes.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for umbrella reviews will be followed. The search will be carried out from inception until 30 September 2023 in the following databases: Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. Two reviewers will independently conduct screening, data extraction, and quality assessment, and to resolve conflicts, adding a third reviewer will facilitate the consensus-building process. The quality assessment will be carried out using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. The review findings will be reported per the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews statement.

RESULTS

This umbrella review seeks to inform future research and practice in critical care medicine, helping to ensure that end-of-life care interventions are optimized to meet the needs of critically ill patients and their families.

A bioethical perspective on the meanings behind a wish to hasten death: a meta-ethnographic review

BACKGROUND

The expressions of a "wish to hasten death" or "wish to die" raise ethical concerns and challenges. These expressions are related to ethical principles intertwined within the field of medical ethics, particularly in end-of-life care. Although some reviews were conducted about this topic, none of them provides an in-depth analysis of the meanings behind the "wish to hasten death/die" based specifically on the ethical principles of autonomy, dignity, and vulnerability. The aim of this review is to understand if and how the meanings behind the "wish to hasten death/die" relate to and are interpreted in light of ethical principles in palliative care.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-ethnographic review according to the PRISMA guidelines and aligned with Noblit and Hare's framework. Searches were performed in three databases, Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, with no time restrictions. Original qualitative studies exploring the meanings given by patients, family caregivers and healthcare professionals in any context of palliative and end-of-life care were included. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. PROSPERO registration CRD42023360330.

RESULTS

Out of 893 retrieved articles, 26 were included in the analysis, accounting for the meanings of a total of 2,398 participants. Several factors and meanings associated with the "wish to hasten death" and/or "wish to die" were identified and are mainly of a psychosocial and spiritual nature. The ethical principles of autonomy and dignity were the ones mostly associated with the "wish to hasten death". Ethical principles were essentially inferred from the content of included articles, although not explicitly stated as bioethical principles.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-ethnographic review shows a reduced number of qualitative studies on the "wish to hasten death" and/or "wish to die" explicitly stating ethical principles. This suggests a lack of bioethical reflection and reasoning in the empirical end-of-life literature and a lack of embedded ethics in clinical practice. There is a need for healthcare professionals to address these topics compassionately and ethically, taking into account the unique perspectives of patients and family members. More qualitative studies on the meanings behind a wish to hasten death, their ethical contours, ethical reasoning, and implications for clinical practice are needed.

The Mapping of Influencing Factors in the Decision-Making of End-of-Life Care Patients: A Systematic Scoping Review

Decisions in end-of-life care are influenced by several factors, many of which are not identified by the decision maker. These influencing factors modify important decisions in this scenario, such as in decisions to adapt to therapeutic support. This presented scoping review aims to map the factors that influence end-of-life care decisions for adult and older adult patients, by a scoping review. The review was carried out in 19 databases, with the keyword 'clinical decision-making' AND 'terminal care' OR 'end-of-life care' and its analogues, including publications from 2017 to 2022. The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews. The search resulted in 3474 publications, where the presence of influencing factors in end-of-life decision-making for adults and the elderly was applied as a selection criterion. Fifty-four (54) of them were selected, which means 1.5% of all the results. Among the selected publications, 89 influencing factors were found, distributed in 54 (60.6%) factors related to the health team, 18 (20.2%) to patients, 10 (11.2%) related to family or surrogates and 7 (7.8%) factors related to the decision environment. In conclusion, we note that the decision-making in end-of-life care is complex, mainly because there is an interaction of different characters (health team, patient, family, or surrogates) with a plurality of influencing factors, associated with an environment of uncertainty and that result in a critical outcome, with a great repercussion for the end of life, making it imperative the recognition of these factors for more competent and safe decision-making.

A systematic review defining non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment in patients with non-cancer diagnoses: theoretical development for multi-stakeholder intervention design in acute care settings

Background

Non-beneficial treatment is closely tied to inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life. Understanding the interplay between how and why these situations arise in acute care settings according to the various stakeholders is pivotal to informing decision-making and best practice at end-of-life.

Aim

To define and understand determinants of  non-beneficial and inappropriate treatments for patients with a non-cancer diagnosis, in acute care settings at the end-of-life.

Design

Systematic review of peer-reviewed studies focusing on the above and conducted in upper-middle- and high-income countries. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, guided by Realist principles.

Data sources

Cochrane; PubMed; Scopus; Embase; CINAHL; and Web of Science.

Results

Sixty-six studies (32 qualitative, 28 quantitative, and 6 mixed-methods) were included after screening 4,754 papers. Non-beneficial treatment was largely defined as when the burden of treatment outweighs any benefit to the patient. Inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life was similar to this, but additionally accounted for patient and family preferences.

Contexts in which outcomes related to non-beneficial treatment and/or inappropriate treatment occurred were described as veiled by uncertainty, driven by organizational culture, and limited by profiles and characteristics of involved stakeholders. Mechanisms relating to ‘Motivation to Address Conflict & Seek Agreement’ helped to lessen uncertainty around decision-making. Establishing agreement was reliant on ‘Valuing Clear Communication and Sharing of Information’. Reaching consensus was dependent on ‘Choices around Timing & Documenting of end-of-life Decisions’.

Conclusion

A framework mapping determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment is developed and proposed to be potentially transferable to diverse contexts. Future studies should test and update the framework as an implementation tool.

Trial registration

PROSPERO Protocol CRD42021214137.

Dilemas bioéticos experimentados por el cuidador respiratorio durante el retiro de la ventilación mecánica en adultos al final de la vida

Introducción: sobre el retiro de la ventilación mecánica al final de la vida, la literatura ha documentado brechas conceptuales en los cuidadores respiratorios y los consecuentes dilemas bioéticos a los que se enfrentan estos profesionales. Objetivo: analizar los dilemas bioéticos que experimentan los cuidadores respiratorios durante el retiro de la ventilación mecánica en adultos al final de la vida a partir de una revisión integradora de la literatura publicada entre 2010 y 2021. Metodología: revisión integrativa de la literatura siguiendo los lineamientos de Whittemore & Knafl (2005) y Guirao Goris (2015). Para el análisis de la información se realizó una evaluación crítica de la literatura acopiada para identificar patrones de comportamiento de los cuidadores respiratorios. Resultados: las enfermedades no transmisibles y crónicas fueron identificadas como las principales condiciones clínicas que determinan la toma de decisiones del cuidador respiratorio en el retiro de la ventilación mecánica paliativa; prolongar la vida de forma artificial a pacientes en estado terminal fue el dilema bioético más frecuente. Conclusiones: los profesionales del cuidado respiratorio enfrentan dilemas éticos en el retiro de la ventilación mecánica al final de la vida de pacientes con afecciones oncológicas y no oncológica; la toma de decisiones se realiza principalmente con base en los principios bioéticos clásicos de Respeto por la autonomía, Beneficencia, No maleficencia y Justicia. Se evidencia la carencia de estudios sobre bioética en diálogo con lineamientos de la Declaración Universal sobre Bioética y Derechos humanos.

Quality indicators of palliative care for cardiovascular intensive care

Healthcare providers working for cardiovascular intensive care often face challenges and they play an essential role in palliative care and end-of-life care because of the high mortality rates in the cardiac intensive care unit. Unfortunately, there are several barriers to integrating palliative care, cardiovascular care, and intensive care. The main reasons are as follows: cardiovascular disease-specific trajectories differ from cancer, there is uncertainty associated with treatments and diagnoses, aggressive treatments are necessary for symptom relief, and there is ethical dilemma regarding withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. Quality indicators that can iterate the minimum requirements of each medical discipline could be used to overcome these barriers and effectively practice palliative care in cardiovascular intensive care. Unfortunately, there are no specific quality indicators for palliative care in cardiovascular intensive care. A few indicators and their domains are useful for understanding current palliative care in cardiovascular intensive care. Among them, several domains, such as symptom palliation, patient- and family-centered decision-making, continuity of care, and support for health care providers that are particularly important in cardiovascular intensive care.

Historically, the motivation for using quality indicators is to summarize mechanisms for external accountability and verification, and formative mechanisms for quality improvement. Practically, when using quality indicators, it is necessary to check structural indicators in each healthcare service line, screen palliative care at the first visit, and integrate palliative care teams with other professionals. Finally, we would like to state that quality indicators in cardiovascular intensive care could be useful as an educational tool for practicing palliative care, understanding the minimum requirements, and as a basic structure for future discussions.

Experiences and attitudes of medical professionals on treatment of end-of-life patients in intensive care units in the Republic of Croatia: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Decisions about limitations of life sustaining treatments (LST) are made for end-of-life patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this research was to explore the professional and ethical attitudes and experiences of medical professionals on treatment of end-of-life patients in ICUs in the Republic of Croatia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among physicians and nurses working in surgical, medical, neurological, and multidisciplinary ICUs in the total of 9 hospitals throughout Croatia using a questionnaire with closed and open type questions. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to reduce data to a smaller set of summary variables. Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyse the differences between two groups and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyse the differences between more than two groups.

RESULTS

Less than third of participants (29.2%) stated they were included in the decision-making process, and physicians are much more included than nurses (p < 0.001). Sixty two percent of participants stated that the decision-making process took place between physicians. Eighteen percent of participants stated that 'do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitations' orders were frequently made in their ICUs. A decision to withdraw inotropes and antibiotics was frequently made as stated by 22.4% and 19.9% of participants, respectively. Withholding/withdrawing of LST were ethically acceptable to 64.2% of participants. Thirty seven percent of participants thought there was a significant difference between withholding and withdrawing LST from an ethical standpoint. Seventy-nine percent of participants stated that a verbal or written decision made by a capable patient should be respected. Physicians were more inclined to respect patient's wishes then nurses with high school education (p = 0.038). Nurses were more included in the decision-making process in neurological than in surgical, medical, or multidisciplinary ICUs (p < 0.001, p = 0.005, p = 0.023 respectively). Male participants in comparison to female (p = 0.002), and physicians in comparison to nurses with high school and college education (p < 0.001) displayed more liberal attitudes about LST limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

DNACPR orders are not commonly made in Croatian ICUs, even though limitations of LST were found ethically acceptable by most of the participants. Attitudes of paternalistic and conservative nature were expected considering Croatia's geographical location in Southern Europe.

End-of-Life Decision-Making in Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Croatia—A Focus Group Study among Nurses and Physicians

Background and Objectives: Working in pediatric and neonatal intensive care units (ICUs) can be challenging and differs from work in adult ICUs. This study investigated for the first time the perceptions, experiences and challenges that healthcare professionals face when dealing with end-of-life decisions in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in Croatia. Materials and Methods: This qualitative study with focus groups was conducted among physicians and nurses working in NICUs and PICUs in five healthcare institutions (three pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) and five neonatal intensive care units (NICUs)) at the tertiary level of healthcare in the Republic of Croatia, in Zagreb, Rijeka and Split. A total of 20 physicians and 21 nurses participated in eight focus groups. The questions concerned everyday practices in end-of-life decision-making and their connection with interpersonal relationships between physicians, nurses, patients and their families. The constant comparative analysis method was used in the analysis of the data. Results: The analysis revealed two main themes that were the same among the professional groups as well as in both NICU and PICU units. The theme “critical illness” consisted of the following subthemes: the child, the family, myself and other professionals. The theme “end-of-life procedures” consisted of the following subthemes: breaking point, decision-making, end-of-life procedures, “spill-over” and the four walls of the ICU. The perceptions and experiences of end-of-life issues among nurses and physicians working in NICUs and PICUs share multiple common characteristics. The high variability in end-of-life procedures applied and various difficulties experienced during shared decision-making processes were observed. Conclusions: There is a need for further research in order to develop clinical and professional guidelines that will inform end-of-life decision-making, including the specific perspectives of everyone involved, and the need to influence policymakers.

End-of-Life Decisions in Intensive Care Units in Croatia-Pre COVID-19 Perspectives and Experiences From Nurses and Physicians

Healthcare professionals working in intensive care units (ICUs) are often involved in end-of-life decision-making. No research has been done so far about these processes taking place in Croatian ICUs. The aim of this study was to investigate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges healthcare professionals face when dealing with end-of-life decisions in ICUs in Croatia. A qualitative study was performed using professionally homogenous focus groups of ICU nurses and physicians (45 in total) of diverse professional and clinical backgrounds at three research sites (Zagreb, Rijeka, Split). In total, six institutions at the tertiary level of healthcare were included. The constant comparative analysis method was used in the analysis of the data. Differences were found between the perceptions and experiences of nurses and physicians in relation to end-of-life decisions. Nurses' perceptions were more focused on the context and features of immediate care, while physicians' perceptions also included the wider sociocultural context. However, the critical issues these specific professional groups face when dealing with end-of-life decisions seem to overlap. A high variability of practices, both between individual practitioners and between different organizational units, was omnipresent. The lack of adequate legal, professional, and clinical guidelines was commonly expressed as one of the most critical source of difficulties.

When is it considered reasonable to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment in critically ill patients? A random sample online questionnaire study

Background

Health care professionals have to judge the appropriateness of treatment in critical care on a daily basis. There is general consensus that critical care interventions should not be performed when they are inappropriate. It is not yet clear which chances of survival are considered necessary or which risk for serious disabilities is acceptable in quantitative terms for different stakeholders to start intensive care treatment.

Methods

We performed an anonymous online survey in a random sample of 1,052 participants recruited via email invitation and social media. Age, sex, nationality, education, professional involvement in health care, critical care medicine and treatment decisions in critical care medicine as well as personal experience with critical illness were assessed as potential influencing variables. Participants provided their opinion on the necessary chances of survival and the acceptable risk for serious disabilities to start a high-risk or uncomfortable therapy for themselves, relatives or for their patients on a scale of 0–100%.

Results

Answers ranged from 0 to 100% for all questions. A three-peak pattern with different distributions of the peaks was observed. Sex, education, being a health care professional, being involved in treatment decisions and religiosity influence these opinions. Male respondents and those with a university education would agree that a risky and uncomfortable treatment should be started even with a low chance of survival for themselves, relatives and patients. More respondents would choose a lower necessary chance of survival (0–33% survival) when deciding for patients compared to themselves or relatives to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment. On the other hand, the majority of respondents would accept only a low risk of severe disability for both themselves and their patients.

Conclusion

No cut-off can be identified for the necessary chances of survival or the acceptable risk of disability to help quantify the “inappropriateness” of critical care treatment. Sex and education are the strongest influencing factors on this opinion. The large variation in personal opinions, depending on demographic and personality variables and education needs to be considered in the communication between health care professionals and patients or surrogates.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00705-4.

Palliative sedation in patients with advanced cancer in a specialized unit in a middle-income country: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the 5-year practice on palliative sedation in a specialized palliative care unit in a deprived region in Brazil, and to compare survival of patients with advanced cancer who were and were not sedated during their end-of-life care.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort study in a tertiary teaching hospital. We described the practice of palliative sedation and compared the survival time between patients who were and were not sedated in their last days of life.

RESULTS

We included 906 patients who were admitted to the palliative care unit during the study period, of whom, 92 (10.2%) received palliative sedation. Patients who were sedated were younger, presented with higher rates of delirium, and reported more pain, suffering, and dyspnea than those who were not sedated. Median hospital survival of patients who received palliative sedation was 9.30 (CI 95%, 7.51-11.81) days and of patients who were not sedated was 8.2 (CI 95%, 7.3-9.0) days (P = 0.31). Adjusted for age and sex, palliative sedation was not significantly associated with hospital survival (hazard ratio = 0.93; CI 95%, 0.74-1.15).

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Palliative sedation can be accomplished even in a deprived area. Delirium, dyspnea, and pain were more common in patients who were sedated. Median survival was not reduced in patients who were sedated.