Perceptions of Ethical Decision-Making Climate Among Clinicians Working in European and U.S. ICUs: Differences Between Nurses and Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: To examine perceptions of nurses and physicians in regard to ethical decision-making climate in the ICU and to test the hypothesis that the worse the ethical decision-making climate, the greater the discordance between nurses' and physicians' rating of ethical decision-making climate with physicians hypothesized to rate the climate better than the nurses. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: A total of 68 adult ICUs in 13 European countries and the United States. SUBJECTS: ICU physicians and nurses. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Perceptions of ethical decision-making climate among clinicians were measured in April-May 2014, using a 35-items self-assessment questionnaire that evaluated seven factors (empowering leadership by physicians, interdisciplinary reflection, not avoiding end-of-life decisions, mutual respect within the interdisciplinary team, involvement of nurses in end-of-life care and decision-making, active decision-making by physicians, and ethical awareness). A total of 2,275 nurses and 717 physicians participated (response rate of 63%). Using cluster analysis, ICUs were categorized according to four ethical decision-making climates: good, average with nurses' involvement at end-of-life, average without nurses' involvement at end-of-life, and poor. Overall, physicians rated ethical decision-making climate more positively than nurses (p < 0.001 for all seven factors). Physicians had more positive perceptions of ethical decision-making climate than nurses in all 13 participating countries and in each individual participating ICU. Compared to ICUs with good or average ethical decision-making climates, ICUs with poor ethical decision-making climates had the greatest discordance between physicians and nurses. Although nurse/physician differences were found in all seven factors of ethical decision-making climate measurement, the factors with greatest discordance were regarding physician leadership, interdisciplinary reflection, and not avoiding end-of-life decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians consistently perceived ICU ethical decision-making climate more positively than nurses. ICUs with poor ethical decision-making climates had the largest discrepancies.

Assessment of acute pain in trauma-A retrospective prehospital evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate pain treatment with analgesics in a prehospital trauma population. DESIGN: Retrospective database study. SETTING: Prehospital data from the anesthesiologist-manned Mobile Emergency Care Unit (MECU) in Odense, Denmark, were extracted and subjected to analysis. PATIENTS: During the period of January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2014, patients with the diagnoses "unspecified multiple injuries," "examination and observation following traffic accident," "examination and observation following other accident," and "commotio cerebri" were included in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Evaluation of the application of the pain scale Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Furthermore, the authors performed a characterization of the patients with mild pain and severe pain according to specific parameters such as pharmacological interventions, opioid consumption, intubation, and others. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty-five cases were analyzed. NRS was documented only in one case. In all, 787 patients experienced no pain or mild pain (no pain, n = 242; mild pain, n = 545) and 168 patients severe pain or worse (severe pain, n = 155; intolerable pain, n = 13). In the severe pain group, 138 were treated with opioid analgesics or S-ketamine, while no pharmacological intervention was documented in 30 cases. Eight of the 138 cases with severe pain needed endotracheal intubation, whereas nine cases in the patients with mild or no pain needed endotracheal intubation; odds ratio (OR) 4.3 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Effect was only documented in one patient after administering opioids in a patient with trauma population, where approximately 17 percent of patients experienced severe pain. Severe pain was correlated to male gender, respiratory intervention, opioid administration, and the diagnosis unspecified multiple injuries.