 Advertisement | ||||||||
 | ||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
|
From the Departments of *Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology and Anthropology, and the Centre For Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
Abstract
Background: The ability of many intensive care unit (ICU) technologies to prolong life has led to an outcomes-oriented approach to technology assessment, focusing on morbidity and mortality as clinically important end points. With advanced life support, however, the therapeutic goals sometimes shift from extending life to allowing life to end. The objective of this study was to understand the purposes for which advanced life support is withheld, provided, continued or withdrawn in the ICU.
Methods: In a 15-bed ICU in a university-affiliated hospital, the authors observed 25 rounds and 11 family meetings in which withdrawal or withholding of advanced life support was addressed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 7 intensivists, 5 consultants, 9 ICU nurses, the ICU nutritionist, the hospital ethicist and 3 pastoral services representatives, to discuss patients about whom life support decisions were made and to discuss life-support practices in general. Interview transcripts and field notes were analysed inductively to identify and corroborate emerging themes; data were coded following modified grounded theory techniques. Triangulation methods included corroboration among multiple sources of data, multidisciplinary team consensus, sharing of results with participants and theory triangulation.
Results: Although life-support technologies are traditionally deployed to treat morbidity and delay mortality in ICU patients, they are also used to orchestrate dying. Advanced life support can be withheld or withdrawn to help determine prognosis. The tempo of withdrawal influences the method and timing of death. Decisions to withhold, provide, continue or withdraw life support are socially negotiated to synchronize understanding and expectations among family members and clinicians. In discussions, one discrete life support technology is sometimes used as an archetype for the more general concept of technology. At other times, life-support technologies are discussed collectively to clarify the pursuit of appropriate goals of care.
Conclusions: The orchestration of death involves process-oriented as well as outcome-oriented uses of technology. These uses should be considered in the assessment of life-support technologies and directives for their appropriate use in the ICU.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  V. Bach, J. Ploeg, and M. Black Nursing Roles in End-of-Life Decision Making in Critical Care Settings West J Nurs Res, June 1, 2009; 31(4): 496 - 512. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Mohammed and E. Peter Rituals, Death and the Moral Practice of Medical Futility Nursing Ethics, May 1, 2009; 16(3): 292 - 302. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Gerstel, R. A. Engelberg, T. Koepsell, and J. R. Curtis Duration of Withdrawal of Life Support in the Intensive Care Unit and Association with Family Satisfaction Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., October 15, 2008; 178(8): 798 - 804. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. D. Shemie, A. J. Baker, G. Knoll, W. Wall, G. Rocker, D. Howes, J. Davidson, J. Pagliarello, J. Chambers-Evans, S. Cockfield, et al. National recommendations for donation after cardiocirculatory death in Canada: Donation after cardiocirculatory death in Canada. Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 10, 2006; 175(8): S1 - S1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. G. Geocadin, M. M. Buitrago, M. T. Torbey, N. Chandra-Strobos, M. A. Williams, and P. W. Kaplan Neurologic prognosis and withdrawal of life support after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Neurology, July 11, 2006; 67(1): 105 - 108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Yaguchi, R. D. Truog, J. R. Curtis, J. M. Luce, M. M. Levy, C. Melot, and J.-L. Vincent International Differences in End-of-Life Attitudes in the Intensive Care Unit: Results of a Survey Arch Intern Med, September 26, 2005; 165(17): 1970 - 1975. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. R. Levy, E. W. Ely, K. Payne, R. A. Engelberg, D. L. Patrick, and J. R. Curtis Quality of Dying and Death in Two Medical ICUs: Perceptions of Family and Clinicians Chest, May 1, 2005; 127(5): 1775 - 1783. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. D. Shemie, C. Doig, and P. Belitsky Advancing toward a modern death: the path from severe brain injury to neurological determination of death Can. Med. Assoc. J., April 15, 2003; 168(8): 993 - 995. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. J. Prendergast and K. A. Puntillo Withdrawal of Life Support: Intensive Caring at the End of Life JAMA, December 4, 2002; 288(21): 2732 - 2740. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. J. Cook, M. O. Meade, and A. G. Perry Qualitative Studies on the Patient's Experience of Weaning From Mechanical Ventilation Chest, December 1, 2001; 120 (2009): 469S - 473S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. I. Hall and G. M. Rocker End-of-Life Care in the ICU : Treatments Provided When Life Support Was or Was Not Withdrawn Chest, November 1, 2000; 118(5): 1424 - 1430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Cusimano The journey through the ICU Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 1, 2000; 162(5): 633 - 634. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | COLLECTIONS | HELP | SEARCH |
|
|||||
|
Copyright 1995-1999, Canadian Medical Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329
(e) 0820-3946 (p)
All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association. |
|||||
