Dataset Information

The role of advance directives in end-of-life decisions in Austria: survey of intensive care physicians.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Currently, intensive care medicine strives to define a generally accepted way of dealing with end-of-life decisions, therapy limitation and therapy discontinuation.In 2006 a new advance directive legislation was enacted in Austria. Patients may now document their personal views regarding extension of treatment. The aim of this survey was to explore Austrian intensive care physicians' experiences with and their acceptance of the new advance directive legislation two years after enactment (2008).

Methods

Under the aegis of the OEGARI (Austrian Society of Anaesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care) an anonymised questionnaire was sent to the medical directors of all intensive care units in Austria. The questions focused on the physicians' experiences regarding advance directives and their level of knowledge about the underlying legislation.

Results

There were 241 questionnaires sent and 139 were turned, which was a response rate of 58%. About one third of the responders reported having had no experience with advance directives and only 9 directors of intensive care units had dealt with more than 10 advance directives in the previous two years. Life-supporting measures, resuscitation, and mechanical ventilation were the predominantly refused therapies, wishes were mainly expressed concerning pain therapy.

Conclusion

A response rate of almost 60% proves the great interest of intensive care professionals in making patient-oriented end-of-life decisions. However, as long as patients do not make use of their right of co-determination, the enactment of the new law can be considered only a first important step forward.

SUBMITTER: Schaden E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2976730 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The role of advance directives in end-of-life decisions in Austria: survey of intensive care physicians.

Schaden Eva E Herczeg Petra P Hacker Stefan S Schopper Andrea A Krenn Claus G CG

BMC medical ethics 20101021

<h4>Background</h4>Currently, intensive care medicine strives to define a generally accepted way of dealing with end-of-life decisions, therapy limitation and therapy discontinuation.In 2006 a new advance directive legislation was enacted in Austria. Patients may now document their personal views regarding extension of treatment. The aim of this survey was to explore Austrian intensive care physicians' experiences with and their acceptance of the new advance directive legislation two years after ...[more]

PMID: 20964852

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn Mainland China, advance directives (ADs) and end-of-life care for patients with tumours, especially patients with brain tumours who may have lost consciousness or the ability to speak at the early stage of their illness, have been poorly acknowledged. Thus, this study aimed to clarify the knowledge and preferences of ADs and end-of-life care in patients with brain tumours and to investigate predictors of patient preferences.MethodsThis was a population-based cross-sectional survey that was conducted via face-to-face interviews. Information on sociodemographic factors, brain tumour illness, knowledge and preferences of the advanced decisions and end-of-life care of the patients was collected.ResultsA total of 88.61% of participants had never heard of ADs, but 65.18% reported that they would like to make ADs. Knowledge of ADs, receiving surgical treatment or radiotherapy, being younger than 70?years old, being male, having educational qualifications of college or beyond, being childless, having medical insurance for nonworking or working urban residents and self-paying medical expenses were predictors of preference for making ADs. A total of 79.43% of participants wanted to discuss end-of-life arrangements with medical staff, and 63.29% of participants were willing to receive end-of-life care, even though it would not delay death. A total of 65.82% of patients with brain tumours wanted resuscitation, and as many as 45.45% of the patients thought that they did not need life support if they were in a persistent vegetative state. Brain primary tumours, being younger than 70?years old, male sex, educational qualification of junior middle school or below, having children, having new rural cooperative medical insurance and having medical expenses paid by children or spouses were predictors of choosing appropriate palliative care.ConclusionsADs and end-of-life care have been poorly acknowledged among patients with brain tumours in mainland China. Additional efforts should be encouraged amongst patients with primary brain tumours, those who are undergoing surgery and radiotherapy and those who have low socioeconomic status. A longitudinal and comprehensive study is encouraged to promote disease-specific ADs among Chinese patients with brain tumours.

Project description:Although experts advocate that physicians should express empathy to support family members faced with difficult end-of-life decisions for incapacitated patients, it is unknown whether and how this occurs in practice.To determine whether clinicians express empathy during deliberations with families about limiting life support, to develop a framework to understand these expressions of empathy, and to determine whether there is an association between more empathic statements by clinicians and family satisfaction with communication.Multi-center, prospective study of audiotaped physician-family conferences in intensive care units of four hospitals in 2000-2002.We audiotaped 51 clinician-family conferences that addressed end-of-life decisions. We coded the transcripts to identify empathic statements and used constant comparative methods to categorize the types of empathic statements. We used generalized estimating equations to determine the association between empathic statements and family satisfaction with communication.There was at least one empathic statement in 66% (34/51) of conferences with a mean of 1.6 +/- 1.6 empathic statements per conference (range 0-8). We identified three main types of empathic statements: statements about the difficulty of having a critically ill loved one (31% of conferences), statements about the difficulty of surrogate decision-making (43% of conferences), and statements about the difficulty of confronting death (27% of conferences). Only 30% of empathic statements were in response to an explicit expression of emotion by family members. There was a significant association between more empathic statements and higher family satisfaction with communication (p = 0.04).Physicians vary considerably in the extent to which they express empathy to surrogates during deliberations about life support, with no empathic statements in one-third of conferences. There is an association between more empathic statements and higher family satisfaction with communication.

Project description:ObjectiveAdvance care planning (ACP) assists people to identify their goals, values and treatment preferences for future care. Ideally, preferences are documented in an advance care directive (ACD) and used by doctors to guide medical decision-making should the patient subsequently lose their decision-making capacity. However, studies demonstrate that ACDs are not always adhered to by doctors in clinical practice. We aim to describe the attitudes and perspectives of doctors regarding ACD adherence and the utility of ACDs in clinical practice.DesignFace-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted using three case-based vignettes to explore doctors' decision-making and attitudes towards ACDs. Transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis.SettingDoctors from a variety of medical specialties and with varying experience levels were recruited from a large tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia.ParticipantsA total of 21 doctors were interviewed, 48% female (10/21). Most (19/21) reported having experience using ACDs.ResultsFour themes were identified: aligning with patient preferences (avoiding unwanted care, prioritising autonomy and anticipating family opposition), advocating best interests (defining futile care, relying on clinical judgement, rejecting unreasonable decisions and disregarding legal consequences), establishing validity (doubting rigour of the decision-making process, questioning patients' ability to understand treatment decisions, distrusting outdated preferences and seeking confirmation) and translating written preferences into practice (contextualising patient preferences, applying subjective terminology and prioritising emergency medical treatment).ConclusionsACDs provide doctors with opportunities to align patient preferences with treatment and uphold patient autonomy. However, doctors experience decisional conflict when attempting to adhere to ACDs in practice, especially when they believe that adhering to the ACD is not in the patients' best interests, or if they doubt the validity of the ACD. Future ACP programmes should consider approaches to improve the validity and applicability of ACDs. In addition, there is a need for ethical and legal education to support doctors' knowledge and confidence in ACP and enacting ACDs.

Project description:BackgroundExperienced and anticipated regret influence physicians' decision-making. In medicine, diagnostic decisions and diagnostic errors can have a severe impact on both patients and physicians. Little empirical research exists on regret experienced by physicians when they make diagnostic decisions in primary care that later prove inappropriate or incorrect. The aim of this study was to explore the experience of regret following diagnostic decisions in primary care.MethodsIn this qualitative study, we used an online questionnaire on a sample of German primary care physicians. We asked participants to report on cases in which the final diagnosis differed from their original opinion, and in which treatment was at the very least delayed, possibly resulting in harm to the patient. We asked about original and final diagnoses, illness trajectories, and the reactions of other physicians, patients and relatives. We used thematic analysis to assess the data, supported by MAXQDA 11 and Microsoft Excel 2016.Results29 GPs described one case each (14 female/15 male patients, aged 1.5-80 years, response rate < 1%). In 26 of 29 cases, the final diagnosis was more serious than the original diagnosis. In two cases, the diagnoses were equally serious, and in one case less serious. Clinical trajectories and the reactions of patients and relatives differed widely. Although only one third of cases involved preventable harm to patients, the vast majority (27 of 29) of physicians expressed deep feelings of regret.ConclusionEven if harm to patients is unavoidable, regret following diagnostic decisions can be devastating for clinicians, making them 'second victims'. Procedures and tools are needed to analyse cases involving undesirable diagnostic events, so that 'true' diagnostic errors, in which harm could have been prevented, can be distinguished from others. Further studies should also explore how physicians can be supported in dealing with such events in order to prevent them from practicing defensive medicine.

Dataset Information

The role of advance directives in end-of-life decisions in Austria: survey of intensive care physicians.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The role of advance directives in end-of-life decisions in Austria: survey of intensive care physicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets