Search

Purpose In intensive care units (ICUs), decisions about the continuation or discontinuation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) are made on a daily basis. Professional guidelines recommend an open exchange of standpoints and underlying arguments between doctors and families to arrive at the most appropriate decision. Yet, it is still largely unknown how doctors and families argue in real-life conversations. This study aimed to (1) identify which arguments doctors and families use in support of standpoints to continue or discontinue LST, (2) investigate how doctors and families structure their arguments, and (3) explore how their argumentative practices unfold during conversations. Method A qualitative inductive thematic analysis of 101 audio-recorded conversations between doctors and families. Results Seventy-one doctors and the families of 36 patients from the neonatal, pediatric, and adult ICU (respectively, N-ICU, P-ICU, and A-ICU) of a large university-based hospital participated. In almost all conversations, doctors were the first to argue and families followed, thereby either countering the doctor's line of argumentation or substantiating it. Arguments put forward by doctors and families fell under one of ten main types. The types of arguments presented by families largely overlapped with those presented by doctors. A real exchange of arguments occurred in a minority of conversations and was generally quite brief in the sense that not all possible arguments were presented and then discussed together. Conclusion This study offers a detailed insight in the argumentation practices of doctors and families, which can help doctors to have a sharper eye for the arguments put forward by doctors and families and to offer room for true deliberation., Author(s): Aranka Akkermans [sup.1] [sup.2], Sanne Prins [sup.1] [sup.2], Amber S. Spijkers [sup.1] [sup.2], Jean Wagemans [sup.3], Nanon H. M. Labrie [sup.4], Dick L. Willems [sup.5], Marcus J. Schultz [sup.6] [...]

Background: Quality of Life (QoL) may be a factor in physicians' decisions on treatment of persons with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities (PIMD). We explored the perception of physicians on the QoL of persons with PIMD. Method: We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven experienced physicians treating persons with PIMD, thematically analysed them and identified clusters of related elements of QoL. Results: Emotional, physical and relational clusters of elements were found. Physicians named mainly emotional elements to describe good QoL, physical elements to describe poor QoL and they emphasised the role of relational context on QoL. In addition, they mentioned a balance between good and poor elements as good QoL. Physical decline, bad prognosis and increasing problems in the relational context influenced QoL in a negative way. Conclusions: The influence of the relational context on both good and poor QoL needs more investigation because of its consequences for ethical decision-making.

Background: The objective of this study was to provide an overview of concepts, methods of assessment and assessors in empirical studies on quality of life (QoL) of persons with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities (PIMD). Method: A narrative literature review was conducted by searching electronic databases until December 2016, and the included studies were then analysed thematically. Results: Twenty-one articles were included in the analysis. Multidimensional concepts of QoL consisting of both subjective and objective components were found, although the articles used different distinctions for each. QoL was assessed by behavioural observations or interviews/questionnaires. Family members, primary caregivers and more distant observers (or a combination of these three) determined QoL. Triangulation of assessors and methodological pluralism were used. Conclusions: This review highlighted several components of QoL in persons with PIMD, as well as challenges in researching the QoL of persons who are not able to express themselves verbally. The distinction between objective and subjective QoL was difficult to clarify, with interpretation being both inevitable and necessary. Although triangulation is seen to be good practice in QoL assessment, the role of proxies in assessing the QoL of persons with PIMD needs further investigation.

The objective of this study is to describe and evaluate understandings of dignity of persons with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. Intrinsic dignity cannot be lost and is inherent to being a human. Also, dignity is the extent to which these persons have enough positive experiences (individual dignity), have dignity in their relationships with familiar others (relational dignity), or with unknown others (societal dignity). While intrinsic dignity sometimes fails to include experiences of these persons and their family members, the other understandings are gradual, which means that these persons can lose their dignity. The understandings express a concern: the life of the person with severe disabilities is, respectively, worth respecting, living, sharing and caring about. We conclude that they can have dignity and that, in case of disagreement, it is important to clarify which dignity is meant and to make explicit the concerns at stake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Team-based palliative care interventions have shown positive results for patients at the end of life in both hospital and community settings. However, evidence on the effectiveness of transmural, that is, spanning hospital and home, team-based palliative care collaborations is limited. Aim: To systematically review whether transmural team-based palliative care interventions can prevent hospital admissions and increase death at home. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), PsychINFO (Ovid), and Cochrane Library (Wiley) were systematically searched until January 2021. Studies incorporating teams in which hospital and community professionals co-managed patients, hospital-based teams with community follow-up, and case-management interventions led by palliative care teams were included. Data was extracted by two researchers independently. Results: About 19 studies were included involving 6614 patients, of whom 2202 received an intervention. The overall pooled odds ratio of at least one hospital (re)admissions was 0.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34–0.68) in favor of the intervention group. The highest reduction in admission was in the hospital-based teams with community follow-up: OR 0.21 (95% CI 0.07–0.66). The pooled effect on home deaths was 2.19 (95% CI 1.26–3.79), favoring the intervention, with also the highest in the hospital-based teams: OR 4.77 (95% CI 1.23–18.47). However, studies had high heterogeneity regarding intervention, study population, and follow-up time. Conclusion: Transmural team-based palliative care interventions, especially hospital-based teams that follow-up patients at home, show an overall effect on lowering hospital admissions and increasing the number of patients dying at home. However, broad clinical and statistical heterogeneity of included studies results in uncertainty about the effect size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]