"Do not resuscitate" order and end-of-life treatment in a cohort of deceased in a Norwegian University Hospital

Do not resuscitate orders and limitation of therapeutic effort: Ethical challenges in healthcare teams in Chile

The purpose of this paper is to delve into the ethical aspects experienced by the healthcare team when they receive the directive to limit therapeutic effort or a do-not-resuscitate order. From an interpretative, qualitative paradigm with a content analysis approach, a process based on three phases was conducted: pre-analysis in which categories were identified, the projection of the analysis, and inductive analysis. During 2023, interviews were conducted in the clinical setting of a high-complexity hospital in Chile with 56 members of the healthcare teams from critical and emergency units, from which four categories emerged: a) the risk of violating patients' rights by using do-not-resuscitate orders and limiting therapeutic effort; b) the gap in the interpretation of the legal framework addressing the care and attention of patients at the end of life or with terminal illnesses by the healthcare team; c) ethical conflicts in end-of-life care; and d) efficient care versus holistic care in patients with terminal illness. There are significant gaps in bioethics training and aspects of a good death in healthcare teams facing the directive to limit therapeutic effort and not resuscitate. It is suggested to train personnel and work on a consensus guide to address the ethical aspects of a good death.

Prevalence of Triggers and Patient Harm Identified by Global Trigger Tool in Specialized Palliative Care

Background: Global trigger tool (GTT) was developed for identification of patient harm. In palliative patients deterioration can be expected, and there are no data on whether cases classified as "patient harm" actually represents a potential for improved patient safety. Objectives: The primary aim was to test the performance and suitability of GTT in palliative care patients. The secondary aim was to pilot triggers for substandard palliative care. Design and Measurements: GTT was applied in 113 consecutive patients at a palliative ward at a Norwegian university hospital. Cases of patient harm were further evaluated to decide if the case was (a) a natural part of the disease trajectory or (b) a foreseeable consequence of treatment decisions. Potential triggers for substandard palliative care were tested. Results: Two hundred twelve triggers (1.9 per hospitalization) and 26 cases of patient harm were identified. The positive predictive value (PPV) for identifying patient harm was 0.12. The most prevalent harm was pressure ulcers (8.8%). Of the 26 cases of patient harm, 6 cases were a natural part of the disease trajectory and 10 consequences of treatment decisions. In 21 (18%) patients triggers being piloted for substandard palliative care were present, identifying 9 cases of substandard palliative care. The highest PPV (0.67) was observed for "Cessation of antibiotics less than 5 days before death." Conclusions: With the exception of pressure ulcers, GTT triggers were infrequent or had a very poor PPV for patient harm. Triggers related to overtreatment might be suitable for identifying substandard palliative care.

Assessing the impact of palliative care admission of end-of-life cancer adults

Background

There is evidence that early admission to the palliative care (PC) program in adult cancer patients improves symptoms management, reduces unplanned hospital admissions, minimizes aggressive cancer treatments, and enables patients to make decisions about their end-of-life (EOL) care.

Objectives

This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine whether late admission to a PC program is associated with aggressive treatment at the EOL in adult patients with oncological diseases from their admission until death.

Design/Methods

The study evaluated the aggressiveness in EOL management in patients with advanced stage oncological diseases who died between 2017 and 2019. The study population was divided into two groups based on the time of admission to the PC program. Aggressiveness at the EOL was measured using five criteria: treatment, hospital admission and duration, emergency department care, and/or intensive care unit utilization.

Results

The study found a significant difference in the rate of aggressive EOL treatments between late admission to PC care and early admission [adjusted EOL 79.6% versus 70.4%; relative risk (RR): 1.98, 90% CI: 1.08-3.59, p: 0.061]; In the analysis of secondary variables, a significant association was observed between early admission to PC and the suspension of active treatments at the EOL, leading to a decrease in aggressiveness (77% versus 55.8%; RR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.14-1.67, p: 0.004).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that early referral to PC services is associated with less aggressive treatment at the EOL, including suspension of active treatments.