Efficiency of acidemia correction on intermittent versus continuous hemodialysis in acute methanol poisoning.

CONTEXT: Acidemia is a marker of prognosis in methanol poisoning, as well as compounding formate-induced cytotoxicity. Prompt correction of acidemia is a key treatment of methanol toxicity and methods to optimize this are poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: We studied the efficiency of acidemia correction by intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in a mass outbreak of methanol poisoning. METHODS: The study was designed as observational cohort study. The mean time for an increase of 1 mmol/L HCO3-, 0.01 unit arterial blood pH, and the total time for correction of HCO3- were determined in IHD- and CRRT-treated patients. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 18 patients treated with IHD and 13 patients treated with CRRT. At baseline, CRRT group was more acidemic than IHD group (mean arterial pH 6.79 ± 0.10 versus 7.05 ± 0.10; p = 0.001). No association was found between the rate of acidemia correction and age, weight, serum methanol, lactate, formate, and glucose on admission. The time to HCO3- correction correlated with arterial blood pH (r= -0.511; p = 0.003) and creatinine (r = 0.415; p = 0.020). There was association between the time to HCO3- correction and dialysate/effluent and blood flow rates (r= -0.738; p < 0.001 and r= -0.602; p < 0.001, correspondingly). The mean time for HCO3- to increase by 1 mmol/L was 12 ± 2 min for IHD versus 34 ± 8 min for CRRT (p < 0.001), and the mean time for arterial blood pH to increase 0.01 was 7 ± 1 mins for IHD versus 11 ± 4 min for CRRT (p = 0.024). The mean increase in HCO3- was 5.67 ± 0.90 mmol/L/h for IHD versus 2.17 ± 0.74 mmol/L/h for CRRT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the superiority of IHD over CRRT in terms of the rate of acidemia correction.

Are religion and religiosity important to end-of-life decisions and patient autonomy in the ICU? The Ethicatt study.

PURPOSE: This study explored differences in end-of-life (EOL) decisions and respect for patient autonomy of religious members versus those only affiliated to that particular religion (affiliated is a member without strong religious feelings). METHODS: In 2005 structured questionnaires regarding EOL decisions were distributed in six European countries to ICUs in 142 hospital ICUs. This sub-study of the original data analyzed answers from Protestants, Catholics and Jews. RESULTS: A total of 304 physicians, 386 nurses, 248 patients and 330 family members were included in the study. Professionals wanted less treatment (ICU admission, CPR, ventilator treatment) than patients and family members. Religious respondents wanted more treatment and were more in favor of life prolongation, and they were less likely to want active euthanasia than those affiliated. Southern nurses and doctors favored euthanasia more than their Northern colleagues. Three quarters of doctors and nurses would respect a competent patient's refusal of a potentially life-saving treatment. No differences were found between religious and affiliated professionals regarding patient's autonomy. Inter-religious differences were detected, with Protestants most likely to follow competent patients' wishes and the Jewish respondents least likely to do so, and Jewish professionals more frequently accepting patients' wishes for futile treatment. However, these findings on autonomy were due to regional differences, not religious ones. CONCLUSIONS: Health-care professionals, families and patients who are religious will frequently want more extensive treatment than affiliated individuals. Views on active euthanasia are influenced by both religion and region, whereas views on patient autonomy are apparently more influenced by region.

Attitudes of European physicians, nurses, patients, and families regarding end-of-life decisions: the ETHICATT study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate attitudes of Europeans regarding end-of-life decisions. DESIGN AND SETTING: Responses to a questionnaire by physicians and nurses working in ICUs, patients who survived ICU, and families of ICU patients in six European countries were compared for attitudes regarding quality and value of life, ICU treatments, active euthanasia, and place of treatment. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Questionnaires were distributed to 4,389 individuals and completed by 1,899 (43%). Physicians (88%) and nurses (87%) found quality of life more important and value of life less important in their decisions for themselves than patients (51%) and families (63%). If diagnosed with a terminal illness, health professionals wanted fewer ICU admissions, uses of CPR, and ventilators (21%, 8%, 10%, respectively) than patients and families (58%, 49%, 44%, respectively). More physicians (79%) and nurses (61%) than patients (58%) and families (48%) preferred being home or in a hospice if they had a terminal illness with only a short time to live. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life was more important for physicians and nurses than patients and families. More medical professionals want fewer ICU treatments and prefer being home or in a hospice for a terminal illness than patients and families.