Home Extubation in a Neonate.

End-of-life care for many infants involves the withdrawal of mechanical ventilation. Usually this takes place in the hospital environment, but sometimes parents request that their infant dies at home. Facilitating this has significant practical and resource implications and raises both logistical and ethical questions. In this article, we report a neonatal case involving home extubation, explaining the processes involved as well as providing an ethical context.

ICU physicians' and nurses' perceptions of terminal extubation and terminal weaning: a self-questionnaire study.

PURPOSE: Terminal extubation (TE) and terminal weaning (TW) are the methods available for withdrawing mechanical ventilation. Perceptions of TE and TW by intensive care unit (ICU) staff may influence bedside practices and the feasibility of studies comparing these methods. METHODS: From January to June 2013, 5 nurses and 5 physicians in each of 46 (out of 70, 65.7 %) French ICUs completed an anonymous self-questionnaire. Clusters of staff members defined by perceptions of TE and TW were identified by exploratory analysis. Denominators for computing percentages were total numbers of responses to each item; cases with missing data were excluded for the relevant item. RESULTS: Of the 451 (98 %) participants (225 nurses and 226 physicians), 37 (8.4 %) had never or almost never performed TW and 138 (31.3 %) had never or almost never performed TE. A moral difference between TW and TE was perceived by 205 (45.8 %) participants. The exploratory analysis identified three clusters defined by personal beliefs about TW and TE: 21.2 % of participants preferred TW, 18.1 % preferred TE, and 60.7 % had no preference. A preference for TW seemed chiefly related to unfavorable perceptions or insufficient knowledge of TE. Staff members who preferred TE and those with no preference perceived TE as providing a more natural dying process with less ambiguity. CONCLUSION: Nearly two-fifths of ICU nurses and physicians in participating ICUs preferred TW or TE. This finding suggests both a need for shared decision-making and training before performing TE or TW and a high risk of poor compliance with randomly allocated TW or TE.

The Least Bad Option: Unilateral Extubation after Declaration of Death by Neurological Criteria.

Typically, the determination of death by neurological criteria follows a very specific protocol. An apnea test is performed with further confirmation as necessary, and then mechanical ventilation is withdrawn with the consent of the family after they have had an opportunity to "say goodbye," and at such a time to permit organ retrieval (with authorization of the patient or consent of the next of kin). Such a process maximizes transparency and ensures generalizability. In exceptional circumstances, however, it may be necessary to deviate from this protocol in order to spare family members unnecessary suffering and to reduce moral distress felt by clinical staff. It may also be appropriate, we argue, to refrain from even inquiring about organ donation when the next-of-kin is not only certain to refuse, but lacks the decision-making capacity to potentially consent. The case described in this article calls into question generally reliable assumptions about determination of death by neurological criteria, where the best the clinical team could do for the patient and his family was "the least bad option."

Should patients receive general anesthesia prior to extubation at the end of life?.

Billings has proposed that any potentially conscious and imminently dying patient who is undergoing withdrawal of ventilator support should be offered general anesthesia to fully protect against suffering. Here we examine whether his proposal is compatible with the doctrine of double effect, a philosophical construct that is generally in accord with the legal requirements for palliative care in the United States. We review the essential elements of the doctrine of double effect, and emphasize the importance of pre-medicating patients before ventilator withdrawal (anticipatory dosing) and of titrating medications to the needs of the patient. The doctrine of double effect requires physicians to balance the risk of the patient suffering against the risk of hastening the patient's deathwhen titrating the medications used to provide comfort. We argue that the values and preferences of the patient should determine how these risks are balanced. We therefore agree with Billings that general anesthesia may be indicated for patients who prefer to minimize the risk of suffering while accepting a greater risk of having their death hastened. This approach would not be appropriate, however, for patients who place a higher value upon avoiding the risk of hastening death, even when this involves a greater risk of potential suffering.