Challenges in reconciling best interest and parental exercise of autonomy in pediatric life-or-death situations

Scandinavian perspectives on life support at the border of viability

Advances in neonatal medicine have allowed us to rescue extremely preterm infants. However, both long-term vulnerability and the burden of treatment in the neonatal period increase with decreasing gestational age. This raises questions about the justification of life support when a baby is born at the border of viability, and has led to a so-called "grey zone", where many professionals are unsure whether provision of life support is in the child's best interest. Despite cultural, political and economic similarities, the Scandinavian countries differ in their approach to periviable infants, as seen in their respective national guidelines and practices. In Sweden, guidelines and practice are more rescue-focused at the lower end of the border of viability, Danish guidelines emphasizes the need to involve parental views in the decision-making process, whereas Norway appears to be somewhere in between. In this paper, I will give an overview of national consensus documents and practices in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, and reflect on the ethical justification for the different approaches.

Postponed Withholding: Balanced Decision-Making at the Margins of Viability

Advances in neonatology have led to improved survival for periviable infants. Immaturity still carries a high risk of short- and long-term harms, and uncertainty turns provision of life support into an ethical dilemma. Shared decision-making with parents has gained ground. However, the need to start immediate life support and the ensuing difficulty of withdrawing treatment stands in tension with the possibility of a fair decision-making process. Both the parental "instinct of saving" and "withdrawal resistance" involved can preclude shared decision-making. To help health care personnel and empower parents, we propose a novel approach labeled "postponed withholding." In the absence of a prenatal advance directive, life support is started at birth, followed by planned redirection to palliative care after one week, unless parents, after a thorough counseling process, actively ask for continued life support. Despite the emotional challenges, this approach can facilitate ethically balanced decision-making processes in the gray zone.

Survey shows marked variations in approaches to redirection of care for critically ill very preterm infants in 11 countries

AIM

We surveyed care practices for critically ill very preterm infants admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in the International Network for Evaluating Outcomes in Neonates (iNeo) to identify differences relevant to outcome comparisons.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey on care practices for critically ill very preterm infants and infants with severe intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). The survey was distributed in 2015 to representatives of 390 NICUs in 11 countries. Survey replies were compared with network incidence of death and severe ICH for infants born between 23^0/7 and 28^6/7  weeks of gestation from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

Most units in Israel, Japan and Tuscany, Italy, favoured withholding care when care was considered futile, whereas most units in other networks favoured redirection of care. For infants with bilateral grade 4 ICH, redirection of care was very frequently (≥90% of cases) offered in the majority of units in Australia and New Zealand and Switzerland, but rarely in other networks. Networks where redirection of care was frequently offered for severe ICH had lower rates of survivors with severe ICH.

CONCLUSION

We identified marked inter-network differences in care approaches that need to be considered when comparing outcomes.

Parent moral distress in serious pediatric illness: A dimensional analysis

BACKGROUND

Moral distress is an important and well-studied phenomenon among nurses and other healthcare providers, yet the conceptualization of parental moral distress remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this dimensional analysis was to describe the nature of family moral distress in serious pediatric illness.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A dimensional analysis of articles retrieved from a librarian-assisted systematic review of Scopus, CINAHL, and PsychInfo was conducted, focusing on how children, parents, other family members, and healthcare providers describe parental moral distress, both explicitly through writings on parental moral experience and implicitly through writings on parental involvement in distressing aspects of the child's serious illness.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

To promote child and family best interest and minimize harm, a nuanced understanding of the moral, existential, emotional, and spiritual impact of serious pediatric illness is needed. The cases used in this dimensional analysis come from the first author's IRB approved study at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and subsequent published studies; or have been adapted from the literature and the authors' clinical experiences.

FINDINGS

Three dimensions emerged from the literature surrounding parent moral distress: an intrapersonal dimension, an interpersonal dimension, and a spiritual/existential dimension. The overarching theme is that parents experience relational solace and distress because of the impact of their child's illness on relationships with themselves, their children, family, healthcare providers, their surrounding communities, and society.

DISCUSSION

Elucidating this concept can help nurses and other professionals understand, mitigate, or eliminate antecedents to parental moral distress. We discuss how this model can facilitate future empirical and conceptual bioethics research, as well as inform the manner in which healthcare providers engage, collaborate with, and care for families during serious pediatric illness.

CONCLUSION

Parent moral distress is an important and complex phenomenon that requires further theoretical and empirical investigation. We provide an integrated definition and dimensional schematic model that may serve as a starting point for future research and dialogue.

A Cross-sectional Study Among Healthcare and Non-healthcare Students in Slovenia and Croatia About Do-not Resuscitate Decision-making

Objective

To survey university students on their views concerning the respect for autonomy of patients and the best interest of patients in relation to the withholding of resuscitation.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey among university students of medicine, nursing, philosophy, law and theology of the first and the final study years at the University of Ljubljana and the University of Zagreb was conducted during the academic year of 2016/2017. A questionnaire constructed by Janiver et al. presenting clinical case vignettes was used.

Results

The survey response rates for students in Ljubljana and Zagreb were 45.4% (512 students) and 37.9% (812 students), respectively. The results of our research show statistically significant differences in do-not resuscitate decisions in different cases between medical and non-medical students in both countries. Male and religious students in both countries have lower odds of respecting relatives’ wishes for the withholding of resuscitation (odds ratio 0.49–0.54; 95% confidence interval). All students agreed that they would first resuscitate children if they had to prioritize among patients.

Conclusions

Our study clearly shows that gender, religious beliefs, and type of study are important factors associated with the decisions pertaining to the respect for autonomy, patient’s best interest, and initiation or withholding of resuscitation.

Physician characteristics influence the trends in resuscitation decisions at different ages

AIM

We examined how physicians in different medical specialties would evaluate treatment decisions for vulnerable patients in need of resuscitation.

METHODS

A survey depicting six acutely ill patients from newborn infant to aged, all in need of resuscitation with similar prognoses, was distributed (in 2009) to a representative sample of 1650 members of the Norwegian Medical Association and 676 members of the Norwegian Pediatric Association.

RESULTS

There were 1335 respondents (57% participation rate). The majority of respondents across all specialties thought resuscitation was in the best interest of a 24 weeks' gestation preterm infant and would resuscitate the patient, but would also accept palliative care on the family's demand. Accepting a family's refusal of resuscitation was more common for the newborn infants. Specialists were overall similar in their answers, but specialty, age and gender were associated with different answers for the patients at both ends of the age spectrum.

CONCLUSION

Resuscitation decisions for the very young do not always seem to follow the best interest principle. Specialty and personal characteristics still have an impact on how we consider important ethical issues. We must be cognisant of our own valuations and how they may influence care.

NICU Dialects: Understanding Norwegian Practice Variation

In Norway, a national consensus-based guideline used to address thresholds for offering life support at extreme preterm birth was issued in 1998. Since then, therapeutic advances may have changed attitudes and expectations to treatment, both within the medical community and the public, and there are concerns that systematic variations in treatment practices may exist. With this article, we describe current practices and relate them to other ethical and legal comparable areas in health care. We conclude that a revision of the 1998 guideline is warranted to obtain a common understanding of prognoses and appropriate decision processes at the limit of viability.

Provider Perspectives Regarding Resuscitation Decisions for Neonates and Other Vulnerable Patients

OBJECTIVES

To use structured surveys to assess the perspectives of pediatric residents and neonatal nurses on resuscitation decisions for vulnerable patients, including neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

Pediatric providers were surveyed using scenarios for 6 critically ill patients of different ages with outcomes explicitly described. Providers were asked (1) whether resuscitation was in each patient's best interest; (2) whether they would accept families' wishes for comfort care (no resuscitation); and (3) to rank patients in order of priority for resuscitation. In a structured interview, each participant explained how they evaluated patient interests and when applicable, why their answers differed for neonates. Interviews were audiotaped; transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis and mixed methods.

RESULTS

Eighty pediatric residents and neonatal nurses participated (response rate 74%). When making life and death decisions, participants considered (1) patient characteristics (96%), (2) personal experience/biases (85%), (3) family's wishes and desires (81%), (4) disease characteristics (74%), and (5) societal perspectives (36%). These factors were not in favor of sick neonates: of the participants, 85% reported having negative biases toward neonates and 60% did not read, misinterpreted, and/or distrusted neonatal outcome statistics. Additional factors used to justify comfort care for neonates included limited personhood and lack of relationships/attachment (73%); prioritization of family's best interest, and social acceptability of death (36%). When these preconceptions were discussed, 70% of respondents reported they would change their answers in favor of neonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Resuscitation decisions for neonates are based on many factors, such as considerations of personhood and family's interests (that are not traditional indicators of benefit), which may explain why decision making is different for the neonatal population.

Update on Ethical Issues in Pediatric Dialysis: Has Pediatric Dialysis Become Morally Obligatory?

Improvements in pediatric dialysis over the past 50 years have made the decision to proceed with dialysis straightforward for the majority of pediatric patients. For certain groups, however, such as children with multiple comorbid conditions, children and families with few social and economic resources, and neonates and infants, the decision of whether to proceed with dialysis remains much more controversial. In this review, we will examine the best available data regarding the outcomes of dialysis in these populations and analyze the important ethical considerations that should guide decisions regarding dialysis for these patients. We conclude that providers must continue to follow a nuanced and individualized approach in decision making for each child and to recognize that, regardless of the decision reached about dialysis, there is a continued duty to care for patients and families to maximize the remaining quality of their lives.

Cost comparison of mechanically ventilated patients across the age span

OBJECTIVE

To compare the use of mechanical ventilation and hospital costs across ventilated patients of all ages, preterm through adults, in a nationally representative sample.

STUDY DESIGN

Secondary analysis of the 2009 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality National Inpatient Sample.

RESULTS

A total of 1 107 563 (2.8%) patients received mechanical ventilation. For surviving ventilated patients, median costs for infants ⩽32 weeks' gestation were $51000 to $209 000, whereas median costs for older patients were lower from $17 000 to $25 000. For non-surviving ventilated patients, median costs were $27 000 to $39 000 except at the extremes of age; the median cost was $10 000 for <24 week newborns and $14 000 for 91+ year adults. Newborns of all gestational ages had a disproportionate share of hospital costs relative to their total volume.

CONCLUSION

Most intensive care unit resources at the extremes of age are not directed toward non-surviving patients. From a perinatal perspective, attention should be directed toward improving outcomes and reducing costs for all infants, not just at the earliest gestational ages.

Attitudes of Australian neonatologists to resuscitation of extremely preterm infants

AIM

We aimed to investigate how Australian neonatologists made decisions when incompetent patients of different ages needed resuscitation.

METHODS

A survey including vignettes of eight incompetent patients requiring resuscitation was sent to 140 neonatologists. Patients ranged from a very preterm infant to 80 years old. While some had existing impairments, all faced risk of death or neurological sequelae. Respondents indicated whether they would resuscitate, whether they believed resuscitation was in the patients' best interests, whether they would want intervention for a family member and whether they would comply with families' wishes to withhold resuscitation. They were also asked how they would rank the eight patients in a triage situation.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight per cent of specialists completed the survey. The majority of respondents gave priority to the resuscitation of children over adults. Less than 40% would agree to withhold resuscitation at families' request for all children except for the preterm infant, where 96% would comply with families' wishes to withhold intensive care despite 77% believing resuscitation to be in the infant's best interest.

CONCLUSION

This study found inconsistencies between physicians' perceptions of the patient's best interest regarding resuscitation and their willingness to comply with families' wishes to withhold resuscitation and give comfort care. Accepting a family's refusal of resuscitation was more marked for the premature infant, even among respondents who thought that resuscitation was in the patient's best interest. These findings are consistent with other international studies.

Nurses’ perceptions of the use of restraint in pediatric somatic care

Background:

The interest in the children’s role in pediatric care is connected to children’s health-related autonomy and informed consent in care. Despite the strong history of children’s rights, nurses’ role in the everyday nursing phenomenon, that is, restraint in somatic pediatric care, is still relatively seldom reported.

Aim:

The aim of this study is to describe nurses’ perceptions of the use of restraint in somatic pediatric care. The ultimate aim is to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon of restraint, whose previous study has been fragmented.

Methods:

Qualitative approach was selected because of the lack of previous information. Due to the sensitivity of the research question, individual interviewees were selected among voluntary nurses (n = 8). All participants were registered nurses with general work experience as nurses of 5–16 years on average and specifically 1.5–10 years in pediatric nursing. Inductive content analysis was used for aiming to produce a synthesis of the research phenomenon.

Ethical considerations:

The research received organizational approval by the university hospital, and informed consent and confidentiality were ensured.

Results:

Restraint in pediatric nursing was process-like, but occurred without advanced planning. The restraint-related process included five categories: (a) identification of the situations where restraint may occur, (b) finding preventive methods, (c) identification of different forms of restraint, (d) rationing the use of restraint, and (e) post-restraint acts. Restraint was seen as a part of pediatric nursing which occurred daily and involved several professionals. According to the nurses’ illustrations, restraint means doing things even when a child is not agreeable.

Conclusion:

Restraint is part of somatic pediatric nursing, described as the last, but in some cases, the only resort for carrying out care or treatment. Restraint is not a goal in itself, but an instrumental tool and procedure in carrying out care. In the future, more information about nurses’ role and the use of restraint in pediatric nursing is still needed.

Modes of death in pediatrics: differences in the ethical approach in neonatal and pediatric patients

OBJECTIVE

To compare end-of-life decisions for neonatal and pediatric patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This study involved a chart review of all pediatric deaths occurring over a 2-year period at a large maternal-child university hospital. Modes of death were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 220 deaths analyzed, 145 occurred in intensive care units (ICUs), including 77 in the neonatal ICU (NICU) and 68 in the pediatric ICU (PICU). Only 6% of deaths were preceded by cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Dying while on the respirator was the most common mode of death in the PICU (51%) and the least common in the NICU (5%; P<.05). Unstable physiology at time of death was much more common in the PICU (82% vs 47%; P<.05). Withdrawal of life-sustaining interventions (LSI) in stable patients for quality of life reasons was the most common cause of death in the NICU (53% vs 16%; P<.05). Seventy-five children died outside of an ICU because LSI were withheld; neonates died mainly of extreme prematurity, and older children died mainly from terminal illness.

CONCLUSION

The majority of pediatric deaths occur in ICUs. Modes of death in the NICU and the PICU are strikingly different. A greater proportion of deaths in the NICU occur in infants with stable physiology who might not have died had LSI not been withdrawn. Most deaths outside of ICUs are attributable to withholding of LSI. A significant proportion of neonates in whom LSI are withheld have a possibility of intact survival, unlike older patients.