Physician workload associated with do-not-resuscitate decision-making in intensive care units: an observational study using Cox proportional hazards analysis

Disparities in Palliative Care Among Critically Ill Patients With and Without COVID-19 at the End of Life: A Population-Based Analysis

Background

The surge in critical illness and associated mortality brought by the coronavirus virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, coupled with staff shortages and restrictions of family visitation, may have adversely affected delivery of palliative measures, including at the end of life of affected patients. However, the population-level patterns of palliative care (PC) utilization among septic critically ill patients with and without COVID-19 during end-of-life hospitalizations are unknown.

Methods

A statewide dataset was used to identify patients aged ≥ 18 years with intensive care unit (ICU) admission and a diagnosis of sepsis in Texas, who died during hospital stay during April 1 to December 31, 2020. COVID-19 was defined by the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) code U07.1, and PC was identified by ICD-10 code Z51.5. Multivariable logistic models were fitted to estimate the association of COVID-19 with use of PC among ICU admissions. A similar approach was used for sensitivity analyses of strata with previously reported lower and higher than reference use of PC.

Results

There were 20,244 patients with sepsis admitted to ICU during terminal hospitalization, and 9,206 (45.5%) had COVID-19. The frequency of PC among patients with and without COVID-19 was 32.0% vs. 37.1%, respectively. On adjusted analysis, the odds of PC use remained lower among patients with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78 - 0.90), with similar findings on sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

PC was markedly less common among critically ill septic patients with COVID-19 during terminal hospitalization, compared to those without COVID-19. Further studies are needed to determine the factors underlying these findings in order to reduce disparities in use of PC.

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.

The Case for Ethical Efficiency: A System That Has Run Out of Time

The American health care system increasingly conflates physician "productivity" with true clinical efficiency. In reality, inordinate time pressure on physicians compromises quality of care, decreases patient satisfaction, increases clinician burnout, and costs the health care system a great deal in the long term even if it is financially expedient in the short term. Inadequate time to deliver care thereby conflicts with the core principles of biomedical ethics, including autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. We propose that the health care system adjust its focus to recognize the nonmonetary value of physician time while still realizing the need to deploy resources as effectively as possible, a concept we describe as "ethical efficiency."

Early versus late DNR orders and its predictors in a Saudi Arabian ICU: A descriptive study

Background

Objective:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion: