Attitudes of Slovene paediatricians to end-of-life care.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to assess the attitudes of Slovene paediatricians to aspects of end-of-life (EOL) care and compare these attitudes between paediatric intensivists, paediatric specialists and paediatric residents. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey, using a specifically designed 43-item anonymous questionnaire. RESULTS: We included 323 out of 586 Slovene paediatricians and residents, while 46.7% (151 of 323) of them responded to our questionnaire. More than half of intensivists (54.2%) had sought counsel from the Committee for Medical Ethics in the past as compared with 12.0% and 12.1% of specialists and residents, respectively (P < 0.001). The decision to limit life-sustaining treatment (LST) was found to be ethically acceptable in all groups of respondents. The highest level of agreement was found in residents (90.2%), followed by 83.3% among intensivists and 73.8% among specialists (P = not statistically significant (NS)). Disagreement with termination of hydration was highest among residents (85%) and intensivists (79.2%) while it was lower among specialists (66.7%) (P = NS). Patient's best interest, good clinical practice and patient's autonomous decision were graded as the top three aspects of the EOL care, while cost effectiveness and availability of patient's bed in intensive care were the least important. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to limit LST measures was found to be ethically acceptable for Slovene paediatricians. No major differences were found among paediatric intensivists, specialist paediatricians and paediatric residents in the attitudes towards the EOL care.

Experiences of Slovene ICU physicians with end-of-life decision making: a nation-wide survey.

BACKGROUND: Advances in intensive care medicine have enormously improved ability to successfully treat seriously ill patients. However, intensive treatment and prolongation of life is not always in the patient's best interest, and many ethical dilemmas arise in end-of-life (EOL) situations. We aimed to assess intensive care unit (ICU) physicians' experiences with EOL decision making and to compare the responses according to ICU type. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was performed in all 35 Slovene ICUs, using a questionnaire designed to assess ICU physician experiences with EOL decision making, focusing on limitations of life-sustaining treatments (LST). RESULTS: We distributed 370 questionnaires (approximating the number of Slovene ICU physicians) and 267 were returned (72% response rate). The great majority of ICU physicians reported using do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders (97%), withholding LST (94%), and withdrawing antibiotics (86%) or inotropes (95%). Fewer ICU physicians reported withdrawing mechanical ventilation (52%) or extubating patients (27%). Hydration was reported to be only rarely terminated (76% of participants reported never terminating it). In addition, 63% of participants had never encountered advance directives, and 39% reported to "never" or "rarely" participating in decision making with relatives of patients. Nurses were reported to be "never" or "rarely" involved in the EOL decision making process by 84% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Limitation of LST was regularly used by Slovene ICU physicians. DNR orders and withholding of LST were the most commonly used measures. Hydration was only rarely terminated. In addition, use of advance directives was almost non-existent in practice, and the patients' relatives and nurses only infrequently participated in the decision making.