Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Monteiro,Nuno Ferreira
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Simões,Isabel, Gaspar,Isabel, Carmo,Eduarda
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302019000901168
Resumo: SUMMARY OBJECTIVE Treatment limitation, as well as do-not-resuscitate (DNR) directives, are difficult but important to improve patients’ quality of life and minimize dysthanasia. We aimed to study the approach to withholding, withdrawal, and DNR decisions, patients’ characteristics, and process documentation in a general Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Portugal. METHODS A retrospective analysis of data regarding the limitation of treatment decisions collected from previously-designed forms and complemented by medical record consultation. RESULTS A total of 1602 patients were admitted to the ICU between 2011 and 2016. DNR decisions were documented in 127 cases (7.9%). Patients with treatment limitations were older and had higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. The most frequent diagnosis preceding these decisions was sepsis (52.0%, n = 66); the most common main reason for limiting treatment was a poor prognosis of acute illness. Of the patients to whom a DNR was implemented, 117 (92.1%) died in the ICU (40.1% of the total number of ICU deaths), and hospital mortality was 100%. Participants in these decisions, as well as types of treatment withdrawn and their respective timings, were not registered in medical records. CONCLUSION Treatment limitation and DNR decisions were relatively common, in line with other Southern European studies, but behind Northern European and North American centers. Patients with these limitations were older and more severely ill than patients without such decisions. Documentation of these processes should be clear and detailed, either in specific forms or computerized clinical records; there is room for improvement in this area.
id AMB-1_d399ec6873b2bab5a0e4f83cfc2a6310
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0104-42302019000901168
network_acronym_str AMB-1
network_name_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care UnitPalliative careCritical CareResuscitation OrdersCritical IllnessWithholding TreatmentSUMMARY OBJECTIVE Treatment limitation, as well as do-not-resuscitate (DNR) directives, are difficult but important to improve patients’ quality of life and minimize dysthanasia. We aimed to study the approach to withholding, withdrawal, and DNR decisions, patients’ characteristics, and process documentation in a general Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Portugal. METHODS A retrospective analysis of data regarding the limitation of treatment decisions collected from previously-designed forms and complemented by medical record consultation. RESULTS A total of 1602 patients were admitted to the ICU between 2011 and 2016. DNR decisions were documented in 127 cases (7.9%). Patients with treatment limitations were older and had higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. The most frequent diagnosis preceding these decisions was sepsis (52.0%, n = 66); the most common main reason for limiting treatment was a poor prognosis of acute illness. Of the patients to whom a DNR was implemented, 117 (92.1%) died in the ICU (40.1% of the total number of ICU deaths), and hospital mortality was 100%. Participants in these decisions, as well as types of treatment withdrawn and their respective timings, were not registered in medical records. CONCLUSION Treatment limitation and DNR decisions were relatively common, in line with other Southern European studies, but behind Northern European and North American centers. Patients with these limitations were older and more severely ill than patients without such decisions. Documentation of these processes should be clear and detailed, either in specific forms or computerized clinical records; there is room for improvement in this area.Associação Médica Brasileira2019-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302019000901168Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.65 n.9 2019reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)instacron:AMB10.1590/1806-9282.65.9.1168info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMonteiro,Nuno FerreiraSimões,IsabelGaspar,IsabelCarmo,Eduardaeng2019-10-08T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0104-42302019000901168Revistahttps://ramb.amb.org.br/ultimas-edicoes/#https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||ramb@amb.org.br1806-92820104-4230opendoar:2019-10-08T00:00Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
title Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
spellingShingle Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
Monteiro,Nuno Ferreira
Palliative care
Critical Care
Resuscitation Orders
Critical Illness
Withholding Treatment
title_short Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
title_full Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
title_fullStr Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
title_full_unstemmed Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
title_sort Do-not-resuscitate and treatment limitation decisions – Six years of experience from a Portuguese General Intensive Care Unit
author Monteiro,Nuno Ferreira
author_facet Monteiro,Nuno Ferreira
Simões,Isabel
Gaspar,Isabel
Carmo,Eduarda
author_role author
author2 Simões,Isabel
Gaspar,Isabel
Carmo,Eduarda
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Monteiro,Nuno Ferreira
Simões,Isabel
Gaspar,Isabel
Carmo,Eduarda
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Palliative care
Critical Care
Resuscitation Orders
Critical Illness
Withholding Treatment
topic Palliative care
Critical Care
Resuscitation Orders
Critical Illness
Withholding Treatment
description SUMMARY OBJECTIVE Treatment limitation, as well as do-not-resuscitate (DNR) directives, are difficult but important to improve patients’ quality of life and minimize dysthanasia. We aimed to study the approach to withholding, withdrawal, and DNR decisions, patients’ characteristics, and process documentation in a general Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Portugal. METHODS A retrospective analysis of data regarding the limitation of treatment decisions collected from previously-designed forms and complemented by medical record consultation. RESULTS A total of 1602 patients were admitted to the ICU between 2011 and 2016. DNR decisions were documented in 127 cases (7.9%). Patients with treatment limitations were older and had higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. The most frequent diagnosis preceding these decisions was sepsis (52.0%, n = 66); the most common main reason for limiting treatment was a poor prognosis of acute illness. Of the patients to whom a DNR was implemented, 117 (92.1%) died in the ICU (40.1% of the total number of ICU deaths), and hospital mortality was 100%. Participants in these decisions, as well as types of treatment withdrawn and their respective timings, were not registered in medical records. CONCLUSION Treatment limitation and DNR decisions were relatively common, in line with other Southern European studies, but behind Northern European and North American centers. Patients with these limitations were older and more severely ill than patients without such decisions. Documentation of these processes should be clear and detailed, either in specific forms or computerized clinical records; there is room for improvement in this area.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-09-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302019000901168
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302019000901168
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1806-9282.65.9.1168
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.65 n.9 2019
reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron:AMB
instname_str Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron_str AMB
institution AMB
reponame_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
collection Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||ramb@amb.org.br
_version_ 1754212834312454144