Nurses' engagement in advance care planning practices: A descriptive cross-sectional study.

AIMS: To describe and compare nurses' awareness of, attitudes toward, and participation in advance care planning, as well as related facilitators and challenges, in four types of healthcare settings. DESIGN: A cross-sectional descriptive study. METHODS: Four hundred and ninety-eight registered nurses from tertiary, secondary and primary healthcare institutions, along with long-term care centres in South Korea, participated in an investigator-developed online survey. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared test, one-way ANOVA, and binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Participants were on average 30.6 ± 7.3 years old, mostly female (95.4%), employed as staff nurses (95.4%), held bachelor's degrees or higher (84.1%), and had worked for less than 5 years at their current institutions (69.7%). Overall, 49% of the participants were familiar with advance care planning. While most participants supported nurse involvement in advance care planning with patients and surrogates, fewer were willing to engage or recommend it. Less than half were actively engaged in advance care planning practices. A notable challenge was the lack of time due to excessive workload. Compared to those from tertiary healthcare institutions, participants from secondary and primary healthcare institutions and long-term care centres were less likely to be aware of advance care planning. Participants from secondary and primary healthcare institutions had lower odds of checking for the presence of advance directives and the physician orders for life-sustaining treatment. CONCLUSION: Nurses demonstrated low awareness and participation in advance care planning. Nurses' insufficient time and competency to conduct advance care planning in their practice should be addressed. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Educational programs, initiatives (e.g. guidelines, position statements) and legal and policy-level efforts (e.g. nurse staffing, role clarification, reimbursement) are crucial to incorporate advance care planning into routine nursing practice. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? Nurses play an important role in advance care planning; however, limited is understood about their readiness and involvement in such practices. What were the main findings? Nurses' awareness of advance care planning practices and their participation in such practices is low across care settings. Although nurses have a positive attitude toward advance care planning, there are challenges (e.g. insufficient time to conduct advance care planning discussions and lack of relevant knowledge and skills) that impede their participation in practice. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This study may serve as a foundation for nursing societies in countries, where advance care planning is emerging, to discuss strategies to increase nurses' competency in advance care planning and promote their participation in the practice. REPORTING METHOD: The STROBE checklist was followed. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Factors Affecting Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions and Changes in Clinical Practice after Enforcement of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decision (LST) Act: A Tertiary Hospital Experience in Korea.

Purpose: In Korea, the act on hospice and palliative care and decisions on life-sustaining treatment (LST) was implemented on February 4, 2018. We aimed to investigate relevant factors and clinical changes associated with LST decisions after law enforcement. Materials and Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who completed LST documents using legal forms at Asan Medical Center from February 5, 2018, to June 30, 2020. Results: 5896 patients completed LST documents, of which 2704 (45.8%) signed the documents in person, while family members of 3,192 (54%) wrote the documents on behalf of the patients. Comparing first year and following year of implementation of the act, the self-documentation rate increased (43.9% to 47.2%, p=0.014). Moreover, the number of LST decisions made during or after ICU admission decreased (37.8% vs. 35.2%, p=0.045), and the completion rate of LST documents during chemotherapy increased (6.6% vs. 8.9%, p=0.001). In multivariate analysis, age < 65 (OR, 1.724; 95% CI, 1.538-1.933; p<0.001), unmarried status (OR, 1.309; 95% CI, 1.097-1.561; p=0.003), palliative care consultation (OR, 1.538; 95% CI, 1.340-1.765; p<0.001), malignancy (OR, 1.864; 95% CI, 1.628-2.133; p<0.001), and changes in timing on the first year versus following year (OR, 1.124, 95% CI, 1.003-1.260, p=0.045) were related to a higher self-documentation rate. Conclusion: Age < 65, unmarried status, malignancy, and referral to a palliative care team were associated with patients making LST decisions themselves. Furthermore, the subject and timing of LST decisions have changed with the LST act.

Influence of health insurance on withdrawal of life sustaining treatment for patients with isolated traumatic brain injury: a retrospective multi-center observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare inequities for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) represent a major priority area for trauma quality improvement. We hypothesized a relationship between health insurance status and timing of withdrawal of life sustaining treatment (WLST) for adults with severe TBI. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective observational cohort study utilized data collected between 2017 and 2020. We identified adult (age ≥ 16) patients with isolated severe TBI admitted participating Trauma Quality Improvement Program centers. We determined the relationship between insurance status (public, private, and uninsured) and the timing of WLST using a competing risk survival analysis framework adjusting for baseline, clinical, injury and trauma center characteristics. Multivariable cause-specific Cox regressions were used to compute adjusted hazard ratios (HR) reflecting timing of WLST, accounting for mortality events. We also quantified the between-center residual variability in WLST using the median odds ratio (MOR) and measured insurance status association with access to rehabilitation at discharge. RESULTS: We identified 42,111 adults with isolated severe TBI treated across 509 trauma centers across North America. There were 10,771 (25.6%) WLST events in the cohort and a higher unadjusted incidence of WLST events was evident in public insurance patients compared to private or uninsured groups. After adjustment, WLST occurred earlier for publicly insured (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12) and uninsured patients (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18-1.41) compared to privately insured patients. Access to rehabilitation was lower for both publicly insured and uninsured patients compared to patients with private insurance. Accounting for case-mix, the MOR was 1.49 (95% CI 1.43-1.55), reflecting significant residual between-center variation in WLST decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the presence of disparate WLST practices independently associated with health insurance status. Additionally, these results emphasize between-center variability in WLST, persisting despite adjustments for measurable patient and trauma center characteristics.

Beyond Legal Boundaries: Public and Clinician Perspectives on Treatment Withdrawal in Infants With Poor Neurological Prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Despite medical advancements in neonatal survival rates, many children have poor neurological outcomes. Because the law in Korea restricts the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment to only cases of imminent death, treatment discontinuation may not be an option, even in patients with poor neurological prognosis. This study investigated the opinions of the general population and clinicians regarding life-sustaining treatment withdrawal in such cases using hypothetical scenarios. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study on the general population and clinicians using a web-based questionnaire. The sample of the general population from an online panel comprised 500 individuals aged 20-69 years selected by quota sampling. The clinician sample comprised 200 clinicians from a tertiary university hospital. We created hypothetical vignettes and questionnaire items to assess attitudes regarding mechanical ventilation withdrawal for an infant at risk of poor neurological prognosis due to birth asphyxia at 2 months and 3 years after the incidence. RESULTS: Overall, 73% of the general population and 74% of clinicians had positive attitudes toward mechanical ventilator withdrawal at 2 months after birth asphyxia. The proportion of positive attitudes toward mechanical ventilator withdrawal was increased in the general population (84%, P < 0.001) and clinicians (80.5%, P = 0.02) at 3 years after birth asphyxia. Religion, spirituality, the presence of a person with a disability in the household, and household income were associated with the attitudes of the general population. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis of the general population, respondents living with a person with a disability or having a disability were more likely to find the withdrawal of the ventilator at 2 months and 3 years after birth asphyxia not permissible. Regarding religion, respondents who identified as Christians were more likely to find the ventilator withdrawal at 2 months after birth asphyxia unacceptable. CONCLUSION: The general population and clinicians shared the perspective that the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment in infants with a poor neurological prognosis should be considered before the end of life. A societal discussion about making decisions centered around the best interest of pediatric patients is warranted.

Recovery Potential in Patients Who Died After Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment: A TRACK-TBI Propensity Score Analysis.

Among patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), there is high prognostic uncertainty but growing evidence that recovery of independence is possible. Nevertheless, families are often asked to make decisions about withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) within days of injury. The range of potential outcomes for patients who died after WLST (WLST+) is unknown, posing a challenge for prognostic modeling and clinical counseling. We investigated the potential for survival and recovery of independence after acute TBI in patients who died after WLST. We used Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) data and propensity score matching to pair participants with WLST+ to those with a similar probability of WLST (based on demographic and clinical characteristics), but for whom life-sustaining treatment was not withdrawn (WLST-). To optimize matching, we divided the WLST- cohort into tiers (Tier 1 = 0-11%, Tier 2 = 11-27%, Tier 3 = 27-70% WLST propensity). We estimated the level of recovery that could be expected in WLST+ participants by evaluating 3-, 6-, and 12-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) and Disability Rating Scale outcomes in matched WLST- participants. Of 90 WLST+ participants (80% male, mean [standard deviation; SD] age = 59.2 [17.9] years, median [IQR] days to WLST = 5.4 [2.2, 11.7]), 80 could be matched to WLST- participants. Of 56 WLST- participants who were followed at 6 months, 31 (55%) died. Among survivors in the overall sample and survivors in Tiers 1 and 2, more than 30% recovered at least partial independence (GOSE ≥4). In Tier 3, recovery to GOSE ≥4 occurred at 12 months, but not 6 months, post-injury. These results suggest a substantial proportion of patients with TBI and WLST may have survived and achieved at least partial independence. However, death or severe disability is a common outcome when the probability of WLST is high. While further validation is needed, our findings support a more cautious clinical approach to WLST and more complete reporting on WLST in TBI studies.

Urban people's preferences for life-sustaining treatment or artificial nutrition and hydration in advance decisions.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Right to Autonomy Act (PRAA), implemented in Taiwan in 2019, enables the creation of advance decisions (AD) through advance care planning (ACP). This legal framework allows for the withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (LST) or artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) in situations like irreversible coma, vegetative state, severe dementia, or unbearable pain. This study aims to investigate preferences for LST or ANH across various clinical conditions, variations in participant preferences, and factors influencing these preferences among urban residents. METHODS: Employing a survey of legally structured AD documents and convenience sampling for data collection, individuals were enlisted from Taipei City Hospital, serving as the primary trial and demonstration facility for ACP in Taiwan since the commencement of the PRAA in its inaugural year. The study examined ADs and ACP consultation records, documenting gender, age, welfare entitlement, disease conditions, family caregiving experience, location of ACP consultation, participation of second-degree relatives, and the intention to participate in ACP. RESULTS: Data from 2337 participants were extracted from electronic records. There was high consistency in the willingness to refuse LST and ANH, with significant differences noted between terminal diseases and extremely severe dementia. Additionally, ANH was widely accepted as a time-limited treatment, and there was a prevalent trend of authorizing a health care agent (HCA) to make decisions on behalf of participants. Gender differences were observed, with females more inclined to decline LST and ANH, while males tended towards accepting full or time-limited treatment. Age also played a role, with younger participants more open to treatment and authorizing HCA, and older participants more prone to refusal. CONCLUSION: Diverse preferences in LST and ANH were shaped by the public's current understanding of different clinical states, gender, age, and cultural factors. Our study reveals nuanced end-of-life preferences, evolving ADs, and socio-demographic influences. Further research could explore evolving preferences over time and healthcare professionals' perspectives on LST and ANH decisions for neurological patients..

The Gap in Attitudes Toward Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment Between Japanese Physicians and Citizens.

BACKGROUND: According to some medical ethicists and professional guidelines, there is no ethical difference between withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment. However, medical professionals do not always agree with this notion. Patients and their families may also not regard these decisions as equivalent. Perspectives on life-sustaining treatment potentially differ between cultures and countries. This study compares Japanese physicians' and citizens' attitudes toward hypothetical cases of withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment. METHODS: Ten vignette cases were developed. A web-based questionnaire was administered to 457 citizens and 284 physicians to determine whether they supported withholding or withdrawing treatment. RESULTS: In a case where a patient had an advance directive refusing ventilation, 77% of the physicians and 68% of the citizens chose to withhold treatment. In a case where there was an advance directive but the patient's family requested treatment, 55% of the physicians and 45% of the citizens chose to withhold the ventilator. When a family requested withdrawal of the ventilator but patient wishes were unknown, 19% of the physicians and 48% of the citizens chose to withdraw the ventilator. However, when the patient had also indicated their wishes in writing, 49% of the physicians and 66% of the citizens chose to withdraw treatment. More physicians were prepared to withdraw dialysis (84%) and artificial nutrition (81%) at a patient's request than mechanical ventilation (49%). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of Japanese physicians and citizens were reluctant to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment, even in cases where the patient had indicated their wishes in writing. They were more likely to withhold than withdraw treatment, and more likely to withdraw artificial nutrition than mechanical ventilation. Japanese physicians gave significant weight to family views about treatment but were less likely to agree to withdraw treatment than citizens, indicating a potential source of conflict in clinical settings.

Withdrawal and withholding of life sustaining treatment (WWLST): an under recognised factor in the morbidity or mortality of periviable infants?-a narrative review.

Background and Objective: The morbidity and mortality of infants born extremely preterm varies substantially across networks, within countries and throughout the globe. Most of the literature tends to focus on the management at birth and choices around active resuscitation of extremely preterm infants. Withdrawal and withholding of life sustaining treatment (WWLST) is an important and central process in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and practices vary substantially. As such, our objective in this review was to explore whether end of life decisions also contribute to variations in the morbidity and mortality of periviable infants. Methods: This narrative literature review is based on studies from the last 15 years found using several searches of medical databases (OVID Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Systematic Reviews) performed between March 2021 and December 2023. Key Content and Findings: Just as outcomes in periviable infants vary, the rates of and processes behind WWLST differ in the periviable population. Variation increases as gestational age decreases. Parental involvement is crucial to share decision making but the circumstances and rates of parental involvement differ. Strict guidelines in end-of-life care may not be appropriate, however there is a need for more targeted guidance for periviable infants as a specific population. The current literature available relating to periviable infants or WWLST is minimal, with many datasets rapidly becoming outdated. Conclusions: Further research is needed to establish the role of WWLST in variation of periviable infants' outcomes. The unification of data, acquisition of more recent datasets and inclusion of variables relating to end-of-life decisions in data collection will aid in this process.

Predictors and outcomes of withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments in intensive care units in Singapore: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines on limitation of life-sustaining treatments (LST) in the intensive care unit (ICU), in the form of withholding or withdrawal of LST, state that there is no ethical difference between the two. Such statements are not uniformly accepted worldwide, and there are few studies on LST limitation in Asia. This study aimed to evaluate the predictors and outcomes of withholding and withdrawal of LST in Singapore, focusing on the similarities and differences between the two approaches. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study of patients admitted to 21 adult ICUs across 9 public hospitals in Singapore over an average of three months per year from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome measures were withholding and withdrawal of LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, invasive mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors/inotropes). The secondary outcome measure was hospital mortality. Multivariable generalised mixed model analysis was used to identify independent predictors for withdrawal and withholding of LST and if LST limitation predicts hospital mortality. RESULTS: There were 8907 patients and 9723 admissions. Of the former, 80.8% had no limitation of LST, 13.0% had LST withheld, and 6.2% had LST withdrawn. Common independent predictors for withholding and withdrawal were increasing age, absence of chronic kidney dialysis, greater dependence in activities of daily living, cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ICU admission, higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and higher level of care in the first 24 h of ICU admission. Additional predictors for withholding included being of Chinese race, the religions of Hinduism and Islam, malignancy, and chronic liver failure. The additional predictor for withdrawal was lower hospital paying class (with greater government subsidy for hospital bills). Hospital mortality in patients without LST limitation, with LST withholding, and with LST withdrawal was 10.6%, 82.1%, and 91.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). Withholding (odds ratio 13.822, 95% confidence interval 9.987-19.132) and withdrawal (odds ratio 38.319, 95% confidence interval 24.351-60.298) were both found to be independent predictors of hospital mortality on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the independent predictors of withholding and withdrawal of LST exist. Even after accounting for baseline characteristics, both withholding and withdrawal of LST independently predict hospital mortality. Later mortality in patients who had LST withdrawn compared to withholding suggests that the decision to withdraw may be at the point when medical futility is recognised.

Care of patients undergoing withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments: an ICU nurse perspective.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses working in South Korea report experiencing uncertainty about how to care for patients undergoing withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments (WLT). A lack of consensus on care guidelines for patients with WLT contributes to uncertainty, ambiguity, and confusion on how to act appropriately within current law and social and ethical norms. To date, little has been discussed or described about how ICU nurses construct meaning about their roles in caring for dying patients in the context of wider social issues about end-of-life care and how this meaning interacts with the ICU system structure and national law. We aimed to better understand how ICU nurses view themselves professionally and how their perceived roles are enabled and/or limited by the current healthcare system in South Korea and by social and ethical norms. METHODS: This qualitative descriptive study was conducted using in-depth, semi-structured interviews and discourse analysis using Gee's Tools of Inquiry. Purposive sampling was used to recruit ICU nurses (n = 20) who could provide the most insightful information on caring for patients undergoing WLT in the ICU. The interviews were conducted between December 2021 and February 2022 in three university hospitals in South Korea. RESULTS: We identified four categories of discourses: (1) both "left hanging" or feeling abandoned ICU nurses and patients undergoing WLT; (2) socially underdeveloped conversations about death and dying management; (3) attitudes of legal guardians and physicians toward the dying process of patients with WLT; and (4) provision of end-of-life care according to individual nurses' beliefs in their nursing values. CONCLUSION: ICU nurses reported having feelings of ambiguity and confusion about their professional roles and identities in caring for dying patients undergoing WLT. This uncertainty may limit their positive contributions to a dignified dying process. We suggest that one way to move forward is for ICU administrators and physicians to respond more sensitively to ICU nurses' discourses. Additionally, social policy and healthcare system leaders should focus on issues that enable and limit the dignified end-of-life processes of patients undergoing WLT. Doing so may improve nurses' understanding of their professional roles and identities as caretakers for dying patients.

The Complex Dynamics of Decision-Making at the End of Life in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review of Stakeholders' Views and Influential Factors.

A lack of consensus resulting in severe conflicts is often observed between the stakeholders regarding their respective roles in end-of-life (EOL) decision-making in the ICU. Since the burden of these decisions lies upon the individuals, their opinions must be known by medical, judicial, legislative, and governmental authorities. Part of the solution to the issues that arise would be to examine and understand the views of the people in different societies. Hence, in this systematic review, we assessed the attitudes of the physicians, nurses, families, and the general public toward who should be involved in decision-making and influencing factors. Toward this, we searched three electronic databases, i.e., PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health), and Embase. A matrix was developed, discussed, accepted, and used for data extraction by two independent investigators. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were extracted by one researcher and double-checked by a second one, and any discrepancies were discussed with a third researcher. The data were analyzed descriptively and synthesized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Thirty-three studies met our inclusion criteria. Most involved healthcare professionals and reported geographic variations in different timeframes. While paternalistic features have been observed, physicians overall showed an inclination toward collaborative decision-making. Correspondingly, the nursing staff, families, and the public are aligned toward patient and relatives' participation, with nurses expressing their own involvement as well. Six categories of influencing factors were identified, with high-impact factors, including demographics, fear of litigation, and regulation-related ones. Findings delineate three key points. Firstly, overall stakeholders' perspectives toward EOL decision-making in the ICU seem to be leaning toward a more collaborative decision-making direction. Secondly, to reduce conflicts and reach a consensus, multifaceted efforts are needed by both healthcare professionals and governmental/regulatory authorities. Finally, due to the multifactorial complexity of the subject, directly related to demographic and regulatory factors, these efforts should be more extensively sought at a regional level.

Factors associated with limitation of life support: Post-ICU mortality case study of a tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: Life-sustaining treatment limitation (LSV) is the medical act of withdrawing or not initiating measures that are considered futile in a patient's specific situation. LSV in critically ill patients remains a difficult topic to study, due to the multitude of factors that condition it. OBJECTIVE: To determine factors related to LSV in ICU in cases of post-ICU in-hospital mortality, as well as factors associated with survival after discharge from ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal study. AMBIT: Intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: People who died in the hospitalization ward after ICU treatment between January 2014 and December 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. This is an observational study. VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Age, sex, probability of death, type of admission, LSV in ICU, oncological disease, dependence, invasive mechanical ventilation, emergency hemodialysis, transfusion of blood products, nosocomial infection (NI), pre-ICU, intra-ICU and post-ICU stays. RESULTS: Of 114 patients who died outside the ICU, 49 had LSV registered in the ICU (42.98%). Age and stay prior to ICU admission were positively associated with LSV (OR 1,03 and 1,08, respectively). Patients without LSV had a higher post-ICU stay, while it was lower for male patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support that LSV established within the ICU can avoid complications commonly associated with unnecessary prolongation of stay, such as NI.

Observations from Optimizing an Electronic Order Set for Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment.

Background: Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) is a process with unique pressure for all involved. The use of an electronic order set can facilitate best care. Objective: To assess utilization of a WLST order set and time to inpatient death before and after optimization. Design: A retrospective chart review for 12-month periods before and after enhancements to a WLST order set. Setting/Subjects: Multicenter study within an American, not-for-profit health care system of inpatient decedents July 2017-June 2018 and April 2021-March 2022 with orders placed via WLST order set. Measurements: Co-primary outcomes included order set utilization and time from activation of orders to patient death. Descriptive post hoc analyses featured demographics, palliative consultation, ordering clinician type/specialty, and COVID-19. Results: A total of 1949 patients had orders placed via the WLST order set and died in-hospital. Compared with the 2017-2018 period, use increased 35.8% in 2021-2022. Time to death after release of orders was significantly longer for the 2021-2022 group (4.4 vs. 3.7 hours). Demographic details included nurse practitioners (39%) as most frequent WLST order set utilizer and palliative consultation in 46% of terminal hospitalizations. Among decedents with consultation, palliative clinicians were the WLST order set utilizer for 47% of cases (i.e., 21% of all WLST order set utilizations). The median time to death was significantly longer when orders were placed by a palliative clinician (4.5 hours) compared with nonpalliative specialists (3.9 hours). COVID-19 was a hospital diagnosis for 29% of decedents in the 2021-2022 group. Conclusions: In the emotionally and cognitively intense process that is WLST, an order set provides a modifiable panel of defaults. Our experience highlights the power in guiding primary palliative care for WLST in the hospital setting and suggests that advanced practice providers and nonpalliative clinicians, as primary utilizers, be integral in the design of a WLST order set.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with do-not-resuscitate and physician orders for life-sustaining treatment in a medical intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In the intensive care unit (ICU), we may encounter patients who have completed a Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) or a Physician Orders to Stop Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) document. However, the characteristics of ICU patients who choose DNR/POLST are not well understood. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the electronic medical records of 577 patients admitted to a medical ICU from October 2019 to November 2020, focusing on the characteristics of patients according to whether they completed DNR/POLST documents. Patients were categorized into DNR/POLST group and no DNR/POLST group according to whether they completed DNR/POLST documents, and logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate factors influencing DNR/POLST document completion. RESULTS: A total of 577 patients were admitted to the ICU. Of these, 211 patients (36.6%) had DNR or POLST records. DNR and/or POLST were completed prior to ICU admission in 48 (22.7%) patients. The DNR/POLST group was older (72.9 ± 13.5 vs. 67.6 ± 13.8 years, p < 0.001) and had higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score (26.1 ± 9.2 vs. 20.3 ± 7.7, p < 0.001) and clinical frailty scale (5.1 ± 1.4 vs. 4.4 ± 1.4, p < 0.001) than the other groups. Solid tumors, hematologic malignancies, and chronic lung disease were the most common comorbidities in the DNR/POLST groups. The DNR/POLST group had higher ICU and in-hospital mortality and more invasive treatments (arterial line, central line, renal replacement therapy, invasive mechanical ventilation) than the other groups. Body mass index, APAHCE II score, hematologic malignancy, DNR/POLST were factors associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Among ICU patients, 36.6% had DNR or POLST orders and received more invasive treatments. This is contrary to the common belief that DNR/POLST patients would receive less invasive treatment and underscores the need to better understand and include end-of-life care as an important ongoing aspect of patient care, along with communication with patients and families.

The Impact of Withdrawing or Withholding of Life-Sustaining Treatment: A Nationwide Case-Control Study Based on Medical Cost Analysis.

This study measured the impact of the Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment Act by analyzing medical cost data from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort. After identifying the patients who died in 2018 and 2019, the case and control groups were set using the presence of codes for managing the implementation of life-sustaining treatment with propensity score matching. Regarding medical costs, the case group had higher medical costs for all periods before death. The subdivided items of medical costs with significant differences were as follows: consultation, admission, injection, laboratory tests, imaging and radiation therapy, nursing hospital bundled payment, and special equipment. This study is the first analysis carried out to measure the impact of the Decision on Life-Sustaining Treatment Act through a cost analysis and to refute the common expectation that patients who decided to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment would go through fewer unnecessary tests or treatments.

Catholic Teaching: A Middle Ground and Guide for End-of-Life Care and Decision-Making and an Antidote for Dying Badly in America.

Dying in the United States is characterized as: medicalized, depersonalized, high technology, fragmented with frequent transitions among care settings, burdensome to patients and families, driven by efficiency and effectiveness, and lacking in key areas, for example, access to palliative care and adequate pain and symptom treatment. Patients and families are often left with a choice of two extremes: vitalism or utilitarian pessimism (utilitarianism). The Catholic Church, however, rejects both of these extremes, and Catholic social teaching (CST) at end of life focuses on ordinary-extraordinary treatments/means, a culture of life and human dignity, accompaniment and community, and caring for whole persons through the end of life. The Catholic tradition of ordinary-extraordinary means is helpful to guide complex end-of-life decisions, regardless of one's religious beliefs, and offers a middle ground between vitalism and utilitarianism that can inform end-of-life care and decision-making for all patients in Catholic health care. While it does not provide answers, it offers guidance and enables conversations that are crucial for the dying and their families to make autonomous, informed decisions about end-of-life care. It provides an opportunity for the dying to let the care team, loved ones, and decision-makers know what a life with meaning, purpose, and passion is for them-and how they want to live and die. This article will summarize the problem, describe end-of-life Catholic teaching, and discuss how it offers a middle-ground. Arguments for and against vitalism and utilitarianism will be explored, including a discussion of CST's response to those receiving care in Catholic health care facilities who are outside the Catholic tradition and do not believe in the teaching. The last section describes a model of collaborative partnership where local parishes and Catholic health care come together to tackle the challenges of caring for and ministering to the seriously ill and those facing death.

Hospital Policy Variation in Addressing Decisions to Withhold and Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Sociodemographic disparities in physician decisions to withhold and withdraw life-sustaining treatment exist. Little is known about the content of hospital policies that guide physicians involved in these decisions. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the prevalence of US hospitals with policies that address withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment; how do these policies approach ethically controversial scenarios; and how do these policies address sociodemographic disparities in decisions to withhold and withdraw life-sustaining treatment? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This national cross-sectional survey assessed the content of hospital policies addressing decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. We distributed the survey electronically to American Society for Bioethics and Humanities members between July and August 2023 and descriptively analyzed responses. RESULTS: Among 93 respondents from hospitals or hospital systems representing all 50 US states, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC, 92% had policies addressing decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. Hospitals varied in their stated guidance, permitting life-sustaining treatment to be withheld or withdrawn in cases of patient or surrogate request (82%), physiologic futility (81%), and potentially inappropriate treatment (64%). Of the 8% of hospitals with policies that addressed patient sociodemographic disparities in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment, these policies provided opposing recommendations to either exclude sociodemographic factors in decision-making or actively acknowledge and incorporate these factors in decision-making. Only 3% of hospitals had policies that recommended collecting and maintaining information about patients for whom life-sustaining treatment was withheld or withdrawn that could be used to identify disparities in decision-making. INTERPRETATION: Although most surveyed US hospital policies addressed withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, these policies varied widely in criteria and processes. Surveyed policies also rarely addressed sociodemographic disparities in these decisions.

Parents' participation in collegial meetings to discuss withholding or withdrawing treatment for their newborn: Working to improve information-sharing.

AIM: The role of parents in decision-making concerning their child's end-of-life care is not clearly defined. Their participation is encouraged by ethical reflection, in particular by the CCNE (French National Ethics Advisory Committee), but laws are limited to imposing a duty to provide information to doctors. Decisions are taken at the end of a collegial meeting (CM) intended to better inform the child's referring physician (RP) who is in charge of the final decision following the French law. The aim of this study was to describe the support provided to bereaved families after they had been invited to attend a CM concerning their child, if they so wished. Additional aims were to determine the differences resulting from their acceptance or their refusal to participate as regards their perception of their child's history and as regards their grieving process. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study of all CMs held between November 2016 and May 2021, drawing a distinction between proposals made or not made to parents and their decision to accept or refuse. RESULTS: In total, 49 CMs concerning 46 children were held during the study period. The proposal was not made to the parents in three cases; the parents chose to be present in 28 cases. The psychological follow-up (15/28 parents attending, 10/16 parents absent) illustrated that their presence enabled them to reflect on their child's death after having listened to and understood the reasons why it happened. They did not dispute the team's approach or decisions taken. CONCLUSION: It is possible to include parents in CMs if they so wish. It would appear more beneficial than merely providing them with the information required. Studies must be carried out to ensure potential long-term benefit.