Syrous AN, Gudnadottir G, Oras J, Ferguson T, Lilja D, Odenstedt Herges H, Larsson E, Block L. End-of-life decision-making in critically ill old patients with and without coronavirus disease 2019.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2024;
68:63-70. [PMID:
37670491 DOI:
10.1111/aas.14326]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2023] [Revised: 07/29/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
There are few studies on the differences in end-of-life decisions making in critically ill patients with and without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to investigate the independent factors that predicted the decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments (LST) in critically ill patients and if these decisions were based on different variables for critically ill patients with COVID-19 compared to those for critically ill patients with other diagnoses in a Swedish intensive care unit.
METHODS
This observational pilot study was performed at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. Patients ≥65 years were included from 1 March 2020 to 30 April 2021. The association between a decision to limit LST and a priori selected variables including sex, age, Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS 3), Clinical Frailty Scale ≥4, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Body Mass Index, living at home, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation was assessed using a univariate and multivariable logistic regression model and presented as odds ratio with corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
There were 394 patients included in this study, 131 in the non-COVID-19 group and 263 in the COVID-19 group. For the non-COVID-19 cohort, the univariate analysis demonstrated that age and SAPS 3 were significantly associated with the decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments, and this association remained in the multivariable analysis, with odds ratios of 1.10 (1.03-1.19) p = .009 and 1.06 (1.03-1.10) p < .001, respectively. For the COVID-19 cohort, the univariate analysis indicated that age, SAPS 3, and Charlson comorbidity index were significantly associated with the decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments. However, in multivariable analysis, only the Charlson comorbidity index remained independently associated with the decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments, with an odds ratio of 1.26 (1.07-1.49), p = .006.
CONCLUSION
Decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments were based on other variables for the critically ill COVID-19 cohort compared to those for the critically ill non-COVID-19 cohort. Further studies are warranted to forge a common path for ethical end-of-life decision-making in critically ill patients.
Collapse