Moral Distress Regarding End-of-Life Care Among Healthcare Personnel in Korean University Hospitals: Features and Differences Between Physicians and Nurses.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals often experience moral distress while providing end-of-life care. This study explored how physicians and nurses experienced moral distress when they cared for critically and terminally ill patients in tertiary hospitals in South Korea. METHODS: This study used semi-structured in-depth interviews. A total of 22 people in two tertiary hospitals were interviewed, nine (40.9%) of which were physicians and 13 (59.1%) were nurses. The recorded interview files and memos were analyzed using grounded theory. RESULTS: Most physicians and nurses encountered similar feelings of anger, helplessness, and burden owing to a lack of appropriate resources for end-of-life care. However, the factors and contexts of their moral distress differed. Nurses mainly addressed poorly organized end-of-life care, intensive labor conditions without support for nurses, and providing care without participation in decision-making. Meanwhile, physicians addressed the prevailing misperceptions on end-of-life care, communication failure between physicians owing to hierarchy and fragmented disciplines, the burden of responsibility in making difficult decisions, and the burden of resource allocation. CONCLUSION: Differences in moral distress between physicians and nurses leave them isolated and can affect communication regarding healthcare. Mutual understanding between job disciplines will enhance their communication and help resolve conflicts in end-of-life care.

Aggressiveness of care in the last days of life in the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Korea.

BACKGROUND: High-quality end-of-life (EOL) care requires both comfort care and the maintenance of dignity. However, delivering EOL in the emergency department (ED) is often challenging. Therefore, we aimed to investigate characteristics of EOL care for dying patients in the ED. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who died of disease in the ED at a tertiary hospital in Korea between January 2018 and December 2020. We examined medical care within the last 24 h of life and advance care planning (ACP) status. RESULTS: Of all 222 disease-related mortalities, 140 (63.1%) were men, while 141 (63.5%) had cancer. The median age was 74 years. As for critical care, 61 (27.5%) patients received cardiopulmonary resuscitation, while 80 (36.0%) received mechanical ventilation. The absence of serious illness (p = 0.011) and the lack of an advance statement (p < 0.001) were both independently associated with the receipt of more critical care. Only 70 (31.5%) patients received comfort care through opioids. Younger patients (< 75 years) (p = 0.002) and those who completed life-sustaining treatment legal forms (p = 0.001) received more comfort care. While EOL discussions were initiated in 150 (67.6%) cases, the palliative care team was involved only in 29 (13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the ED underwent more aggressive care and less comfort care in a state of imminent death. To ensure better EOL care, physicians should minimize redundant evaluations and promptly introduce ACP.

Care for critically and terminally ill patients and moral distress of physicians and nurses in tertiary hospitals in South Korea: A qualitative study.

Physicians and nurses working in acute care settings, such as tertiary hospitals, are involved in various stages of critical and terminal care, ranging from diagnosis of life-threatening diseases to care for the dying. It is well known that critical and terminal care causes moral distress to healthcare professionals. This study aimed to explore moral distress in critical and terminal care in acute hospital settings by analyzing the experiences of physicians and nurses from various departments. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted in two tertiary hospitals in South Korea. The collected data were analyzed using grounded theory. A total of 22 physicians and nurses who had experienced moral difficulties regarding critical and terminal care were recruited via purposive maximum variation sampling, and 21 reported moral distress. The following points were what participants believed to be right for the patients: minimizing meaningless interventions during the terminal stage, letting patients know of their poor prognosis, saving lives, offering palliative care, and providing care with compassion. However, family dominance, hierarchy, the clinical culture of avoiding the discussion of death, lack of support for the surviving patients, and intensive workload challenged what the participants were pursuing and frustrated them. As a result, the participants experienced stress, lack of enthusiasm, guilt, depression, and skepticism. This study revealed that healthcare professionals working in tertiary hospitals in South Korea experienced moral distress when taking care of critically and terminally ill patients, in similar ways to the medical staff working in other settings. On the other hand, the present study uniquely identified that the aspects of saving lives and the necessity of palliative care were reported as those valued by healthcare professionals. This study contributes to the literature by adding data collected from two tertiary hospitals in South Korea.

Practical Considerations in Providing End-of-Life Care for Dying Patients and Their Family in the Era of COVID-19.

In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing and strict visitation policies at hospitals have made it difficult for medical staff to provide high-quality end-of-life (EOL) care to dying patients and their families. There are various issues related to EOL care, including psychological problems of patients and their families, difficulties in EOL decision-making, the complicated grief of the bereaved family, moral distress, and exhaustion of medical staff. In relation to these issues, we aimed to discuss practical considerations in providing high-quality EOL care in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, medical staff should discuss advance care planning as early as possible and use the parallel planning strategy. Second, medical staff should play a role in facilitating patient-family communication. Third, medical staff should actively and proactively evaluate and alleviate dying patients' symptoms using non-verbal communication. Lastly, medical staff should provide care for family members of the dying patient, who may be particularly vulnerable to post-bereavement problems in the COVID-19 era. Establishing a system of screening high-risk individuals for complicated grief and connecting them to bereavement support services might be considered. Despite the challenging and limited environment, providing EOL care is essential for patients to die with dignity in peace and for the remaining family to return to life after the loved one's death. Efforts considering the practical issues faced by all medical staff and healthcare institutions caring for dying patients should be made.

Implication of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Act on End-of-Life Care for Korean Terminal Patients.

PURPOSE: Life-sustaining treatment (LST) decisions for patients and caregivers at the end-of-life (EOL) process are supported by the "Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on LST for Patients at the EOL," enforced in February 2018. It remains unclear whether the act changes EOL decisions and LST implementation in clinical practice. For this study, we investigated patients' decision-making regarding LSTs during the EOL process since the act's enforcement. Materials and Methods: Retrospective reviews were conducted on adult patients who were able to decide to terminate LST and died at Seoul National University Hospital between February 5, 2018, and February 5, 2019. We examined demographics, who made the decisions, the type and date of documentation confirming patient's LST, and whether the LST was withheld or withdrawn. RESULTS: Of 809 patients who were enrolled, 29% (n=231) completed forms regarding LST themselves, and 71% (n=578) needed family members to decide. The median time from confirmation of the EOL process to death and from the Advance Statement to death were 2 and 5 days, respectively (both ranges, 0 to 244). In total, 90% (n=727) of patients withheld treatment, and 10% (n=82)withdrew it. We found a higher withdrawal rate when family members made the decisions (13.3% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: After the act's enforcement, withdrawing LSTs became lawful and self-determination rates increased. Family members still make 71% of decisions regarding LSTs, but these are often inconsistent with the patients' wishes; thus, further efforts are needed to integrate the new act into clinical practice.