Process of foregoing life-sustaining treatment: a survey among Scandinavian intensivists.

BACKGROUND: How ethical issues are dealt with varies considerably depending on the geographic and religious background of individuals. The views of Scandinavian physicians on end-of-life care were studied using a survey. The aim of this study was to clarify the actual processes of foregoing life-sustaining treatment in Scandinavia. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed and sent to 78 intensive care physicians working in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. RESULTS: Forty-four responses were obtained (13 from Denmark, eight from Finland, 12 from Norway and 11 from Sweden); 89% of the respondents were from University Hospitals. Withholding and withdrawing of treatment were practiced in all intensive care units (ICUs) concerned, but written guidelines on end-of-life care existed in only one ICU. End-of-life care is usually arranged in the ICU. Religious support is available in most hospitals during office hours, but lacking in 26% of ICUs outside office hours. Vasoactive medication, renal replacement therapy, and artificial nutrition are among the therapies most likely to be discontinued during withdrawal of life support. Certain types of monitoring and organ support are still continued in many centers during end-of-life care. CONCLUSION: Local written guidelines on end-of-life care are scarce in Scandinavian ICUs, which may explain the observed variability in the practices. Development of guidelines and monitoring how these instructions are carried out may help to improve the quality of care of dying ICU patients.

Ethical issues in intensive care--a survey among Scandinavian intensivists.

BACKGROUND: The general principles of medical ethics are universally accepted. In practice, however, there is variation on how these principles are interpreted by people with different cultural backgrounds. The aim of this study was to document the views of Scandinavian intensive care physicians on intensive care unit (ICU) admission, triage, withholding and withdrawal of intensive care, and communication between the patient, the family and the ICU team. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed and sent to 84 intensive care physicians working in Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway. RESULTS: The response rate was 61%. In general, the responses were in agreement with published guidelines. Nevertheless, there was considerable variation on what factors are taken into account when priority decisions are made. In addition, the views on the content of information provided to the family varied. A majority of 80% reported priority decisions being made on a regular basis. Less than one-half of the respondents had correct knowledge regarding the existence or lack of national guidelines on intensive care ethics. Only 8% of the respondents were aware of guidelines published by the Society of Critical Care Medicine. CONCLUSION: Variation in priority determinants between individual physicians may compromise justice in health care. An effort should be made to discuss and adopt mutual principles. In addition, the quality of information available to the patients' representatives deserves our attention. The results of this study could be used as a basis for discussion when guidelines on the ethical aspects of intensive care are developed and reviewed.

Scandinavian research in anaesthesiology 1981-2000: visibility and impact in EU and world context.

BACKGROUND: We wished to assess the development in number and impact of publications in anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine from 1981 to 2000 in the four Scandinavian countries: Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. For comparison, we also analyzed data from the UK and the Netherlands. METHODS: Publication and citation data from 1981 to 2000 were gathered from National Science Indicators (2001), covering 33 journals indexed in Current Contents. Data were analyzed in running 5-year periods. The following informetric indicators were used: absolute number of publications; absolute number of citations; absolute citation impact (average number of citations per publication per 5-year period); citation impact relative to the European Union and the world; and the percentage of cited papers from each country. RESULTS: The annual number of publications from Denmark was stable over the 20-year period. Sweden increased its production by 35%, while the remaining four countries showed increases from 100% to 146%. Thus, Sweden and Denmark lost visibility within the European Union (EU) and in world context. The EU and world citation shares of Finland and Norway increased slightly, whereas those of Sweden, Denmark, the UK, and the Netherlands all declined significantly. The absolute citation impact (ACI) increased for all the four Scandinavian countries. The ACI of the Netherlands did not change and was surpassed by all the Scandinavian countries by 1994-98, while the UK finished below the other five countries. CONCLUSIONS: (1) The annual number of publications from Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, and the Netherlands increased after the late eighties, whereas the net publication output from Denmark was stagnant over the 20-year period investigated; (2) the international publication and citation visibility of Finland and Norway increased slightly, as opposed to the significant decrease seen by the other four countries; (3) judging from the increase in absolute and relative citation impact and in the percentage of cited papers, the recognition of publications from the four Scandinavian countries increased over the past 20 years.