Are religion and religiosity important to end-of-life decisions and patient autonomy in the ICU? The Ethicatt study
- 2.3k Downloads
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).
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.
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.
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.
KeywordsEnd-of-life Religion Intensive care Autonomy Euthanasia
This paper has been supported by “Region Zealand Health Sciences Research Foundation,” The European Commission contract QLG6-CT-1999-00933 grant no. 5206 from the Chief Scientist’s office of the Ministry of Health, Israel, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Critical Care Research Network. 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.
- 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.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.http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Archive/N-AJIS-2001-Highlights_Report.pdf. Accessed 5th of Jan 2012
- 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.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
- 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.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
- 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
- 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.Bowling A (2009) Research methods in health. Investigating health and health services. 3rd edn. Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar