Advertisement

‘Less is more’ in modern ICU: blessings and traps of treatment limitation

  • Bara RicouEmail author
  • Ruth Piers
  • Hans Flaatten
Less is more in Intensive Care
Although most critically ill patients survive, many may do so in a physical and mental state that would not have desired. In the past, the majority of critically ill patients succumbed to the burden of their disease, but those few who managed to survive tended to make a full recovery. Today, critical illness may be followed by a spectrum of outcomes, some worse than others (Fig.  1). Recent developments in the ethics of intensive care have taught us that the sense of care that we are providing may sometimes be more important than the actual extent of care. The level of care provided should match that considered meaningful by the patient and their relatives. However, it should also be viewed as appropriate by the caregivers and society. If this is not the case for one or more of the parties, then maybe, we are doing too much. Maybe, the values or interests of these parties are such that lead them to prefer not to pursue treatment.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Halpern SD et al (2014) An official American Thoracic Society/American Association of critical-care nurses/American College of chest physicians/Society of critical care medicine policy statement: the choosing wisely(R) top 5 list in critical care medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 190(7):818–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Piers RD et al (2011) Perceptions of appropriateness of care among European and Israeli intensive care unit nurses and physicians. JAMA 306(24):2694–2703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Merlani P et al (2011) Burnout in ICU caregivers: a multicenter study of factors associated to centers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 184(10):1140–1146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Embriaco N et al (2007) Burnout syndrome among critical care healthcare workers. Curr Opin Crit Care 13(5):482–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Azoulay E et al (2009) Prevalence and factors of intensive care unit conflicts: the conflicts study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180(9):853–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Breen CM et al (2001) Conflict associated with decisions to limit life-sustaining treatment in intensive care units. J Gen Intern Med 16(5):283–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Verdon M et al (2008) Burnout in a surgical ICU team. Intensive Care Med 34(1):152–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herridge MS et al (2016) The RECOVER program: disability risk groups and 1-year outcome after 7 or more days of mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 194(7):831–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown SM et al (2019) Approaches to addressing post-intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit (ICU) survivors: a narrative review. Ann Am Thorac Soc 16:947–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Myers EA et al (2016) Post-ICU syndrome: rescuing the undiagnosed. JAAPA 29(4):34–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hill AD et al (2016) Long-term outcomes and healthcare utilization following critical illness—a population-based study. Crit Care 20:76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piers RD et al (2014) Inappropriate care in European ICUs: confronting views from nurses and junior and senior physicians. Chest 146(2):267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cameron JI et al (2016) One-year outcomes in caregivers of critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 374(19):1831–1841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haines KJ et al (2019) Key mechanisms by which post-ICU activities can improve in-ICU care: results of the international THRIVE collaboratives. Intensive Care Med 45(7):939–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Benoit DD et al (2018) Outcome in patients perceived as receiving excessive care across different ethical climates: a prospective study in 68 intensive care units in Europe and the USA. Intensive Care Med 44(7):1039–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Acute Care Medicine, University Hospitals of GenevaUniversity of GenevaGeneva 4Switzerland
  2. 2.Department of Geriatrics and Palliative CareGhent University HospitalGhentBelgium
  3. 3.Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive CareHaukeland University HospitalBergenNorway
  4. 4.Department of Clinical MedicineUniversity of BwergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations