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.

[Possibilites of application of traditional Chinese medicine - acupuncture - in the perioperative period.] / A hagyományos kínai orvoslás ­ akupunktúra ­ alkalmazásának lehetoségei a perioperatív idoszakban.

Chinese medicine is a holistic method of therapy with thousands of years of history. There are more assumptions regarding the mechanism of action, nevertheless, several studies have demonstrated its therapeutic effect. Nowadays, patients and physicians have become open to complementary medicine, but acupuncture used in the perioperative period has not yet widespread in Hungary. The aim of the article is to describe traditional Chinese medicine, primarily the effect of acupuncture and laser acupuncture on patients undergoing surgery. Relieving anxiety before surgery, alleviating pain, nausea and vomiting during and after surgery is a basic anesthesiology task, however, the drug therapy can be supplemented with any technique of acupuncture. Based on numerous studies, acupuncture effectively reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea, has an anxiolytic and analgesic effect, and also has an anti-inflammatory effect caused by surgical stress. There are rarely contraindications to its application, accurate knowledge of the rules of point selection and with proper technique acupuncture is a low-risk, pain-free procedure that can be performed by inducing a mild needling sensation. Based on all this, it can become a part of multimodal therapy. Orv Hetil. 2023; 164(30): 1187-1193.

[Changes in the incidence of multiresistant pathogens and its consequences in the intensive care unit]. / Multirezisztens kórokozók gyakoriságának változása és ennek vonatkozásai az intenzív osztályon.

UNLABELLED: Incidence of nosocomial infections and antibiotics resistance in intensive care units is increasing worldwide. Blood-stream infections of Gram-negative non-fermentive bacteria are associated with higher mortality. AIM AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare the antibiotic sensitivity of nosocomial blood-stream infections between years 2008-2010. RESULTS: There was no difference in the sensitivity of methycillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and extended-spectrum beta lactamase producing Klebsiella spp. and Escherichia coli infections between the two years examined. Antibiotic resistance of Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas infections showed a marked increase in 2010 when compared to that found in 2008: there was no multiresistant Acinetobacter infection in samples obtained in 2008, but all these infections were found to be sensitive only to colistin in samples investigated in 2010. Sensitivity of Pseudomonas infections to carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam decreased significantly during this time. In addition, the authors found that the mortality of multiresistant Gram-negative blood-stream infections was higher compared to that caused by non-multiresistant bacteria. CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasize the importance of infection control, adequate dosing and timing of antibiotics, and an appropriate number of nurses in intensive care unit.

Relationship between the coronavirus epidemic and the use of complementary and alternative medicine prior to elective surgical procedures / A koronavírus-járvány hatása a komplementer terápiás gyógymódok igénybevételére elektív sebészeti mutétek elott.

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: A 2019 végén Vuhanból kiinduló, SARS-CoV-2 okozta koronavírus-járvány jelentos hatást gyakorolt életünkre. Specifikus terápia hiányában az emberek egy része alternatív gyógymódokhoz fordult. Célkituzés: Vizsgálatunk célja annak feltárása volt, milyen hatást gyakorolt a koronavírus-járvány a betegek komplementer gyógymódokhoz való viszonyulására elektív sebészeti mutétek elott. Módszer: Egy magyarországi klinika és egy városi kórház elektív sebészeti mutétre váró betegei körében végeztünk anonim kérdoíves felmérést 2020. augusztus 3. és december 18. között. 279 kérdoívet dolgoztunk fel, a válaszadási arány 69,7% volt. Eredmények: A koronavírus-járvány hatására a válaszadók 91,4%-ának nem változott meg a véleménye a nem konvencionális kezelésekrol, 8,2%-a bizakodóbban tekintett ezekre. A komplementer terápia betegségmegelozo hatása iránt a kitöltok 16,8%-a volt bizakodó, 25,4%-a elutasító, 57,7%-a nem formált véleményt. A válaszadók 24,7%-a vett igénybe élete során alternatív módszereket, a koronavírus-fertozés megelozésére csak a nyilatkozók 10%-a alkalmazna ilyen gyógymódokat. Kizárólag a pandémia hatására senki nem kezdett el komplementer gyógymódokat használni. A kérdoívet kitöltok 55,6%-a használt gyógynövénykészítményt élete során. A járvány ideje alatt a válaszadók 27,5%-a vett igénybe gyógynövénykészítményeket; a gyógymód alkalmazása és a vizsgált szociodemográfiai tényezok között nem találtunk összefüggést. A gyógynövények alkalmazása alacsonyabb mértéku volt a daganatos és a thromboemboliás betegek között. Következtetés: Vizsgálatunk alapján a komplementer gyógymódok használata feltehetoen a járvány miatt elrendelt korlátozásokból adódóan csökkent, a gyógynövények alkalmazása azonban nem változott lényegesen. A válaszadók tizede használt komplementer gyógymódot a koronavírus-fertozés megelozésére. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(42): 1678-1686. INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 from Wuhan at the end of 2019 had considerable impact on our lives. In the absence of specific therapy, some people have resorted to alternative therapies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to explore the effect of the coronavirus epidemic on the patients' attitudes toward complementary and alternative medicine. METHOD: We have performed anonymous questionnaire survey among patients of a Hungarian university hospital and a city hospital waiting for elective surgery between August 3, 2020 and December 18, 2020. We received 279 questionnaires, the response rate was 69.7%. RESULTS: As a result of the coronavirus epidemic, 91.4% of the respondents did not change their opinion about complementary and alternative treatments, 8.2% were more optimistic about them. 16.8% of respondents were optimistic, 25.4% rejected, and 57.7% did not form an opinion about the disease-preventing effect of complementary therapy. A quarter of respondents (24.7%) had used complementary therapies in their lifetime, with only 10% of respondents using such therapies to prevent coronavirus infection. As a result of the pandemic, no one started using complementary therapies. 55.6% of the respondents used a herbal preparation during their lifetime. In the course of the epidemic, a high proportion of respondents (27.5%) used herbal preparations; no correlation was found between the use of the treatment and the socio-demographic factors examined. The use of herbs was lower among cancer and thromboembolic patients. CONCLUSION: Based on our study, the use of complementary therapies presumably decreased due to the restrictions imposed in the epidemic, however, the use of herbs did not change significantly. One-tenth of the respondents used naturopathic cure to prevent coronavirus infection. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(42): 1678-1686.

Role of faith in strategies of healthcare professionals in intensive care units in end-of-life decision making / A vallásosság szerepe az intenzív osztályon dolgozó orvosok és ápolók véleményének kialakításában az életvégi döntések meghozatalakor.

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: A haldoklást minden korban kulturális és vallási szabályok vették körül, melyek a mai napig hatnak a társadalomban. A 21. században számos beteg a kórházban, az intenzív osztályon fejezi be életét, ahol nem ritkán kerülhet sor életvégi döntés meghozatalára. Célkituzés: Vizsgálatunk célja annak feltárása volt, milyen hatással van az orvosok és ápolók vallásossága a kezeléskorlátozással kapcsolatos döntésekre az intenzív osztályon. Módszer: Magyarországi intenzív osztályokon dolgozó orvosok és szakdolgozók körében végeztünk kérdoíves felmérést a vallás életvégi döntésekre gyakorolt hatásáról. 189 orvos és 105 ápoló által anonim módon kitöltött kérdoívet elemeztünk. Eredmények: Az intenzív osztályra történo betegfelvételre nem volt hatással a vallásosság, azonban a szabad ágyak száma a vallásos orvosokat erosebben befolyásolta, mint az ateista és választ nem adó orvosokat (<0,0001). A vallásukat gyakorló orvosok szignifikánsan jobban figyelembe vették a hozzátartozó kérését, mint az ateisták (p = 0,0002). A vallásos ápolók gyakrabban folytatnák a beteg kezelését a hozzátartozó kérése ellenére is, ha még látnának esélyt a gyógyulásra, mint a nem vallásosak. Következtetés: Vizsgálatunk alátámasztotta, hogy a világnézet befolyásolja az orvosokat és ápolókat az élet végérol hozott döntésekben. A kezeléskorlátozásról hozott döntés összetett, elengedhetetlen megismerni hozzá a beteg és családjának haldoklással kapcsolatos vallási szokásait, mivel jó életvégi döntés a világnézeti szempontok figyelembevétele nélkül nem hozható. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(51): 2047-2054. INTRODUCTION: Death has always been surrounded by habits in all ages, influenced by cultural and religious differences. Many patients finish their lives at intensive care units where end-of-life decisions are the part of everyday practice in the 21th century. OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to assess how the religious beliefs of physicians and nurses affect their decision on therapy restriction. METHOD: We have performed questionnaire-based enquiries among physicians and nurses working at intensive care units on how religion affects end-of-life decisions. We have analyzed the anonymous questionnaires filled out by 189 physicians and 105 nurses. RESULTS: Our results have confirmed the hypothesis that religion affects decision making about therapy restriction. Patients' admissions were not affected by religious beliefs, but the number of available patient beds influenced the religious physicians more than the atheists ones or the non-responders (<0.0001). Actively religious physicians complied significantly better with the relatives than atheists (p = 0.0002). Religious nurses would continue patient treatment even against the will of relatives more often than atheists if they see a chance for recovery. CONCLUSION: The study supports that religion influences physicians and nurses in their end-of-life decisions. Decisions on therapy restriction are complex; it is important to find out religious beliefs and perception of death among patients and families because good end-of-life decision cannot be made disregarding religious considerations. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(51): 2047-2054.

Variations in end-of-life practices in intensive care units worldwide (Ethicus-2): a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life practices vary among intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. Differences can result in variable use of disproportionate or non-beneficial life-sustaining interventions across diverse world regions. This study investigated global disparities in end-of-life practices. METHODS: In this prospective, multinational, observational study, consecutive adult ICU patients who died or had a limitation of life-sustaining treatment (withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy and active shortening of the dying process) during a 6-month period between Sept 1, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, were recruited from 199 ICUs in 36 countries. The primary outcome was the end-of-life practice as defined by the end-of-life categories: withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy, active shortening of the dying process, or failed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Patients with brain death were included in a separate predefined end-of-life category. Data collection included patient characteristics, diagnoses, end-of-life decisions and their timing related to admission and discharge, or death, with comparisons across different regions. Patients were studied until death or 2 months from the first limitation decision. FINDINGS: Of 87 951 patients admitted to ICU, 12 850 (14·6%) were included in the study population. The number of patients categorised into each of the different end-of-life categories were significantly different for each region (p<0·001). Limitation of life-sustaining treatment occurred in 10 401 patients (11·8% of 87 951 ICU admissions and 80·9% of 12 850 in the study population). The most common limitation was withholding life-sustaining treatment (5661 [44·1%]), followed by withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (4680 [36·4%]). More treatment withdrawing was observed in Northern Europe (1217 [52·8%] of 2305) and Australia/New Zealand (247 [45·7%] of 541) than in Latin America (33 [5·8%] of 571) and Africa (21 [13·0%] of 162). Shortening of the dying process was uncommon across all regions (60 [0·5%]). One in five patients with treatment limitations survived hospitalisation. Death due to failed CPR occurred in 1799 (14%) of the study population, and brain death occurred in 650 (5·1%). Failure of CPR occurred less frequently in Northern Europe (85 [3·7%] of 2305), Australia/New Zealand (23 [4·3%] of 541), and North America (78 [8·5%] of 918) than in Africa (106 [65·4%] of 162), Latin America (160 [28·0%] of 571), and Southern Europe (590 [22·5%] of 2622). Factors associated with treatment limitations were region, age, and diagnoses (acute and chronic), and country end-of-life legislation. INTERPRETATION: Limitation of life-sustaining therapies is common worldwide with regional variability. Withholding treatment is more common than withdrawing treatment. Variations in type, frequency, and timing of end-of-life decisions were observed. Recognising regional differences and the reasons behind these differences might help improve end-of-life care worldwide. FUNDING: None.

Prevalence of Disagreement About Appropriateness of Treatment Between ICU Patients/Surrogates and Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: ICU patients/surrogates may experience adverse outcomes related to perceived inappropriate treatment. The objective was to determine the prevalence of patient/surrogate-reported perceived inappropriate treatment, its impact on adverse outcomes, and discordance with clinicians. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study of adult ICU patients. RESULTS: For 151 patients, 1,332 patient, surrogate, nurse, and physician surveys were collected. Disagreement between patients/surrogates and clinicians regarding "too much" treatment being administered occurred in 26% of patients. Disagreement regarding "too little" treatment occurred in 10% of patients. Disagreement about perceived inappropriate treatment was associated with prognostic discordance (P = .02) and lower patient/surrogate satisfaction (Likert scale 1-5 of 4 vs 5; P = .02). Patient/surrogate respondents reported "too much" treatment in 8% of patients and "too little" treatment in 6% of patients. Perceived inappropriate treatment was associated with moderate or high respondent distress for 55% of patient/surrogate respondents and 35% of physician/nurse respondents (P = .30). Patient/surrogate perception of inappropriate treatment was associated with lower satisfaction (Family Satisfaction in the ICU Questionnaire-24, 69.9 vs 86.6; P = .002) and lower trust in the clinical team (Likert scale 1-5 of 4 vs 5; P = .007), but no statistically significant differences in depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2 of 2 vs 1; P = .06) or anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Scale of 7 vs 4; P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: For approximately one-third of ICU patients, there is disagreement between clinicians and patients/surrogates about the appropriateness of treatment. Disagreement about appropriateness of treatment was associated with prognostic discordance and lower patient/surrogate satisfaction. Patients/surrogates who reported inappropriate treatment also reported lower satisfaction and trust in the ICU team.