Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 38, Issue 7, pp 1126–1133 | Cite as

Are religion and religiosity important to end-of-life decisions and patient autonomy in the ICU? The Ethicatt study

  • Hans-Henrik Bülow
  • Charles L. Sprung
  • Mario Baras
  • Sara Carmel
  • Mia Svantesson
  • Julie Benbenishty
  • Paulo A. Maia
  • Albertus Beishuizen
  • Simon Cohen
  • Daniel Nalos
Original

Abstract

Purpose

This study explored differences in end-of-life (EOL) decisions and respect for patient autonomy of religious members versus those only affiliated to that particular religion (affiliated is a member without strong religious feelings).

Methods

In 2005 structured questionnaires regarding EOL decisions were distributed in six European countries to ICUs in 142 hospital ICUs. This sub-study of the original data analyzed answers from Protestants, Catholics and Jews.

Results

A total of 304 physicians, 386 nurses, 248 patients and 330 family members were included in the study. Professionals wanted less treatment (ICU admission, CPR, ventilator treatment) than patients and family members. Religious respondents wanted more treatment and were more in favor of life prolongation, and they were less likely to want active euthanasia than those affiliated. Southern nurses and doctors favored euthanasia more than their Northern colleagues. Three quarters of doctors and nurses would respect a competent patient’s refusal of a potentially life-saving treatment. No differences were found between religious and affiliated professionals regarding patient’s autonomy. Inter-religious differences were detected, with Protestants most likely to follow competent patients’ wishes and the Jewish respondents least likely to do so, and Jewish professionals more frequently accepting patients’ wishes for futile treatment. However, these findings on autonomy were due to regional differences, not religious ones.

Conclusions

Health-care professionals, families and patients who are religious will frequently want more extensive treatment than affiliated individuals. Views on active euthanasia are influenced by both religion and region, whereas views on patient autonomy are apparently more influenced by region.

Keywords

End-of-life Religion Intensive care Autonomy Euthanasia 

References

  1. 1.
    Yazigi A, Riachi M, Dabbar G (2005) Withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in a Lebanese intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 31:562–567PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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 decisions in European intensive care units—the Ethicus study. JAMA 290:790–797PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mani RK, Mandal AK, Bal S, Javeri Y, Kumar R, Nama DK, Pandey P, Rawat T, Singh N, Tewari H, Uttam R (2009) End-of-life decisions in an Indian intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 35:1713–1719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doval HC, Borracci RA, Giorgi MA, Darú V, Tanús E, Núñez C (2009) Survey of medical attitudes towards a “case scenario” of encephalopathy after cardiac arrest. Medicina (B Aires) 69:157–162 (article in Spanish)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sprung CL, Carmel S, Sjokvist P, Baras M, Cohen SL, Maia P, Beishuizen A, Nalos D, Novak I, Svantesson M, Benbenishty J, Henderson B, ETHICATT Study Group (2007) Attitudes of European physicians, nurses, patients, and families regarding end-of-life decisions. The Ethicatt study. Intensive Care Med 33:104–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Sprung CL, Woodcock T, Sjokvist P, Ricou B, Bulow HH, Lippert A, Maia P, Cohen S, Baras M, Hovilehto S, Ledoux D, Phelan D, Wennberg E, Schobersberger W (2008) Reasons, considerations, difficulties and documentation of end-of-life decisions in European intensive care units. Intensive Care Med 34:271–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sprung CL, Maia P, Bulow HH, Ricou B, Armaganidis A, Baras M, Wennberg E, Reinhart K, Cohen SL, Fries, Nakos G, Thijs LG, Ethicus Study Group (2007) The importance of religious affiliation and culture on end-of-life decisions in European intensive care units. Intensive Care Med 33:1732–1739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Phelps AC, Maciejewski PK, Nilsson M, Balboni TA, Wright AA, Paulk ME, Trice E, Schrag D, Peteet JR, Block SD, Prigerson HG (2009) Religious coping and use of intensive life-prolonging care near death in patients with advanced cancer. JAMA 301:1140–1147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wenger NS, Carmel S (2004) Physicians’ religiosity and end-of-life care attitudes and behaviours. Mount Sinai J Med 71:335–343Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yun YH, Han KH, Park S, Park BW, Cho CH, Kim S, Lee DH, Lee SN, Lee ES, Kang JH, Kim SY, Lee JL, Heo DS, Lee CG, Lim YK, Kim SY, Choi JS, Jeong HS, Chun M (2011) Attitudes of cancer patients, family caregivers, oncologists and members of the general public toward critical interventions at the end of life of terminally ill patients. CMAJ 183:E673–E679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seale C (2010) The role of doctors’ religious faith and ethnicity in taking ethically controversial decisions during end-of-life care. J Med Ethics 36:677–682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bülow HH, Sprung CL, Reinhart K, Prayag S, Du B, Armaginidis A, Abroug F, Mitchell MM (2008) The world’s major religions’ point of view on end-of-life decisions in the ICU. Intensive Care Med 34:423–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holt J (2008) Nurses’ attitudes to euthanasia: the influence of empirical studies and methodological concerns on nursing practice. Nurs Philos 9:257–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lawrence RE, Curlin FA (2009) Autonomy, religion and clinical decisions: findings from a national physician survey. J Med Ethics 35:214–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ferrand E, Lemaire F, Regnier B, Kuteifan K, Badet M, Asfar P, Jaber S, Chagnon JL, Renault A, Robert R, Pochard F, Herve C, Brun-Buisson C, Duvaldestin P, French RESSENTI Group (2003) Discrepancies between perceptions of physicians and nurses in EOL decisions. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 167:1310–1315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Azoulay E, Timsit JF, Sprung CL, Conflicus Study Investigators and the Ethics Section of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine et al (2009) Prevalence and factors of intensive care unit conflicts: the Conflicus study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180:853–860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roland G (2004) Understanding institutional change: fast-moving and slow-moving institutions. Studies in comparative international development (SCID), Springer, 38:109–131 doi: 10.1007/BF02686330
  19. 19.
    Bowling A (2009) Research methods in health. Investigating health and health services. 3rd edn. Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gerstel E, Engelberg RA, Koepsell T, Curtis JR (2008) Duration of withdrawal of life support in the intensive care unit, and association with family satisfaction. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 178:798–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Casarett DJ, Crowley R, Hirschman KB (2003) Surveys to assess satisfaction with end-of-life care: does timing matter? J Pain Symptom Manage 25:128–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lo B, Ruston D, Kates LW, Arnold RM, Cohen CB, Faber-Langendoen K, Pantilat SZ, Puchalski CM, Quill TR, Rabow MW, Schreiber S, Sulmasy DP, Tulsky JA (2002) Discussing religious and spiritual issues at the end-of-life. A practical guide for physicians. JAMA 287:749–754PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Balboni TA, Vanderwerker LC, Block SD, Paulk ME, Lathan CS, Peteet JR, Prigerson HG (2007) Religiousness and spiritual support among advanced cancer patients and associations with end-of-life treatment preferences and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 25:555–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Copyright jointly held by Springer and ESICM 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans-Henrik Bülow
    • 1
  • Charles L. Sprung
    • 2
  • Mario Baras
    • 3
  • Sara Carmel
    • 4
  • Mia Svantesson
    • 5
  • Julie Benbenishty
    • 2
  • Paulo A. Maia
    • 6
  • Albertus Beishuizen
    • 7
  • Simon Cohen
    • 8
  • Daniel Nalos
    • 9
  1. 1.Intensive CareHolbaek Hospital, Region ZealandHolbaekDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care MedicineHadassah Hebrew University Medical CenterJerusalemIsrael
  3. 3.Hadassah School of Public Health, Hadassah Medical CenterThe Hebrew UniversityJerusalemIsrael
  4. 4.Centre for Multidisciplinary Research in AgingBen-Gurion University of the NegevNegevIsrael
  5. 5.Centre for Health Care ResearchÖrebro University HospitalÖrebroSweden
  6. 6.Department of Intensive Care, Centro HospitalarHospital S. AntonioPortoPortugal
  7. 7.Medical CenterVU UniversityAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  8. 8.Intensive Care UnitUniversity College HospitalLondonUK
  9. 9.Krajská zdravotní a.s.ARO Masarykova nemocnice Ústí nadLabemCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations