Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 104–110 | Cite as

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

  • Charles L. Sprung
  • Sara Carmel
  • Peter Sjokvist
  • Mario Baras
  • Simon L. Cohen
  • Paulo Maia
  • Albertus Beishuizen
  • Daniel Nalos
  • Ivan Novak
  • Mia Svantesson
  • Julie Benbenishty
  • Beverly Henderson
  • ETHICATT Study Group
Original

Abstract

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.

Keywords

End of life End of life decisions End-of-life care Ethics Attitudes Physicians 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by European Commission contract QLG6-CT-1999-00933, grant no. 5206 from the Chief Scientist's Office of the Ministry of Health, Israel, and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. The EU Commission and other sponsors had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data or in the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. The ETHICATT study group included the following participants: Administrative and Scientific Coordinating Center (Israel): C. Sprung (Coordinator), J. Kabiri (Administrator), J. Benbenishty (Coordinating nurse), M. Baras (Statistician), S. Carmel (Questionnaire development, reliability, validity, and translation). Investigators were: Czech Republic: I. Novak (Charles University Hospital, Pilsen), D. Nalos (Aro Masarykova Nemonice, Usti nad Labem); Israel: C.L. Sprung, J. Benbenishty, D Moriah (Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem), S. Carmel, D Sagie (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva); The Netherlands: B. Beishuizen, L.G. Thijs, VU Hospital, Amsterdam); Portugal: P. Maia, J.A. Pinho, P. Costa, P. Coimbra (Hospital Geral Santo Antonio, Porto); Sweden: P. Sjokvist, M. Svantesson (Orebro University Hospital, Orebro); United Kingdom: S. Cohen, B. Henderson (University College London, London)

Supplementary material

134_2006_405_MOESM1_ESM.rtf (21 kb)
Electronic Supplementary Material (RTF 22K)
134_2006_405_MOESM2_ESM.doc (116 kb)
Electronic Supplementary Material (DOC 116K)
134_2006_405_MOESM3_ESM.doc (75 kb)
Electronic Supplementary Material (DOC 75K)
134_2006_405_MOESM4_ESM.doc (100 kb)
Electronic Supplementary Material (DOC 100K)
134_2006_405_MOESM5_ESM.doc (102 kb)
Electronic Supplementary Material (DOC 102K)

References

  1. 1.
    Sprung CL, Eidelman LA (1996) Worldwide similarities and differences in the forgoing of life-sustaining treatments. Intensive Care Med 22:1003–1005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sprung CL, Eidelman LA, Pizov R (1996) Changes in foregoing life sustaining treatments in the United States: concern for the future. Mayo Clin Proc 71:512–516PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM (1998) A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 158:1163–1167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P, Baras M, Bulow HH, Hovilehto S, Ledoux D, Lippert A, Maia P, Phelan D, Schobersberger W, Wennberg E, Woodcock T, Ethicus Study Group (2003) End of life practices in European intensive care units—the Ethicus Study. JAMA 290:790–797PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vincent JL (1999) Forgoing life support in western European intensive care units: the results of an ethical questionnaire. Crit Care Med 27:1626–1633PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen S, Sprung CL, Sjokvist P, Lippert A, Ricou B, Baras M, Hovilehto S, Maia P, Phelan D, Reinhart K, Werdan K, Bulow HH (2005) Communication of end of life decisions in European intensive care units—the Ethicus Study. Intensive Care Med 31:1215–1221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weir RF, Gostin L (1990) Decisions to abate life-sustaining treatment for non-autonomous patients. Ethical standards and legal liability after Cruzan. JAMA 264:1846–1853PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sjokvist P, Cook D, Berggren L, Guyatt GH (1998) A cross-cultural comparison of attitudes towards life support limitation in Sweden and Canada. Clin Intensive Care 9:81–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Danis M, Gerrity MS, Southerland LI, Patrick DL (1998) A comparison of patient, family, and physician assessments of the value of medical intensive care. Crit Care Med 16:594–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gillick MR, Hesse K, Mazzapica N (1993) Medical technology at the end if life. What would physicians and nurses want for themselves. Arch Intern Med 153:2542–2547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Danis M, Patrick DL, Southerland LI, Green ML (1998) Patients' and families' preferences for medical intensive care. JAMA 260:797–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carmel S (1999) Life-sustaining treatments: what doctors do, what they want for themselves and what elderly persons want. Soc Sci Med 49:1401–1408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hofmann JC, Wenger NS, Davis RV, Teno J, Connors AF, Desbiens N, Lynn J, Phillips RS (1997) Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end of life decisions. Ann Intern Med 127:1–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Webster GC, Mazer CD, Potuin CA, Fisher A, Byrick RJ (1991) Evaluation of a “do not resuscitate” policy in intensive care. Can J Anaesth 38:553–563PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carmel S, Mutran E (1997) Wishes regarding the use of life-sustaining treatments among elderly persons in Israel: an explanatory model. Soc Sci Med 45:1715–1727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wennberg JE (1990) Outcomes, research, cost containment and the fear of health care rationing. N Engl J Med 323:1202–1213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heyland DK, Rocker GM, O'Callaghan CJ, Dodek PM, Cook DJ (2003) Dying in the ICU. Perspectives of Family Members. Chest 124:392–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Angus DC, Barnato AE, Linde-Zwirble WT, Weissfeld LA, Watson RS, Rickert T, Rubenfeld GD, Robert Wood Jonhson Foundation ICU End-Of-Life Peer Group (2004) Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an epidemiological study. Crit Care Med 32:638–643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sprung CL, Carmel S, Maia P et al. (2005) Attitudes of European doctors, nurses, patients and families for end of life care (abstract). Presented at the 18th Annual Congress European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, September 27:2005, Amsterdam. Intensive Care Med 31:S156Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Asai A, Fukuhara S, Lo, B (1995) Attitudes of Japanese and Japanese-American physicians toward life-sustaining treatment. Lancet 346:356–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seckler AB, Meier DE, Mulvihill M, Cammer Paris BE (1991) Substituted judgment: how accurate are proxy predictions? Ann Intern Med 115:92–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murphy DJ, Burrows D, Santilli S, Kemp AW, Tenner S, Kreling B, Teno J (1994) The influence of the probability of survival on patients; preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. N Engl J Med 330:545–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heap MJ, Munglani R, Klinck JR, Males AG (1993) Elderly patients' preferences concerning life-support treatment. Anaesthesia 48:1027–1033PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elpern EH, Patterson PA, Gloskey D, Bone RC (1992) Patient's preferences for intensive care. Crit Care Med 20:43–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gerety MB, Chiodo LK, Kanten DN, Tuley MR, Cornell JE (1993) Medical treatment preferences of nursing home residents: relationship to function and concordance with surrogate decision-makers. J Am Geriatr Soc 41:953–960PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fried TR, Bradley EH, Towle VR, Allore H (2002) Understanding the treatment preferences of seriously ill patients. N Engl J Med 346 14:1061–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Uhlmann RF, Pearlman RA (1991) Perceived quality of life and preferences for life-sustaining treatment in older adults. Arch Intern Med 151:495–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carmel S, Mutran E (1997) Preferences for different life-sustaining treatments among elderly persons in Israel. J Gerontology Social Science 528:S97–S102Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Finucane TE (1999) How gravely ill becomes dying: a key to end-of-life care. JAMA 282:1670–1672PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rigter H (1989) Active euthanasia in The Netherlands. JAMA 262:3316–3319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Blendon RJ, Szalay US, Knox RA (1992) Should physicians aid their patients in dying: the public perspective. JAMA 267:2658–2662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bachman JG, Alcser KH, Doukas DJ, Lichtenstein RL, Corning AD, Brody H (1996) Attitudes of Michigan physicians and the public toward legalizing physician-assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia. N Engl J Med 334:303–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles L. Sprung
    • 1
  • Sara Carmel
    • 2
  • Peter Sjokvist
    • 3
  • Mario Baras
    • 4
  • Simon L. Cohen
    • 5
  • Paulo Maia
    • 6
  • Albertus Beishuizen
    • 7
  • Daniel Nalos
    • 8
  • Ivan Novak
    • 9
  • Mia Svantesson
    • 10
  • Julie Benbenishty
    • 1
  • Beverly Henderson
    • 5
  • ETHICATT Study Group
    • 1
  1. 1.General Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care MedicineHadassah Hebrew University Medical CenterJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Center for Multidisciplinary Research in Aging, and Department of Sociology of HealthBen-Gurion University of the NegevBeer ShevaIsrael
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesiology, Orebro University HospitalOrebro and Huddinge University HospitalStockholmSweden
  4. 4.Hadassah School of Public HealthHebrew University--Hadassah Medical CenterJerusalemIsrael
  5. 5.Department of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  6. 6.Department of Intensive CareHospital Geral Santo AntonioPortoPortugal
  7. 7.Department of Intensive CareVU Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  8. 8.Department of Intensive CareMasarykUsti nad LabemCzech Republic
  9. 9.Department of MedicineCharles University Medical School and Teaching HospitalPilsenCzech Republic
  10. 10.Institution of Clinical MedicineOrebro UniversityOrebroSweden

Personalised recommendations