PurposeWhether the quality of the ethical climate in the intensive care unit (ICU) improves the identification of patients receiving excessive care and affects patient outcomes is unknown.MethodsIn this prospective observational study, perceptions of excessive care (PECs) by clinicians working in 68 ICUs in Europe and the USA were collected daily during a 28-day period. The quality of the ethical climate in the ICUs was assessed via a validated questionnaire. We compared the combined endpoint (death, not at home or poor quality of life at 1 year) of patients with PECs and the time from PECs until written treatment-limitation decisions (TLDs) and death across the four climates defined via cluster analysis.ResultsOf the 4747 eligible clinicians, 2992 (63%) evaluated the ethical climate in their ICU. Of the 321 and 623 patients not admitted for monitoring only in ICUs with a good (n = 12, 18%) and poor (n = 24, 35%) climate, 36 (11%) and 74 (12%), respectively were identified with PECs by at least two clinicians. Of the 35 and 71 identified patients with an available combined endpoint, 100% (95% CI 90.0–1.00) and 85.9% (75.4–92.0) (P = 0.02) attained that endpoint. The risk of death (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.20–2.92) or receiving a written TLD (HR 2.32, CI 1.11–4.85) in patients with PECs by at least two clinicians was higher in ICUs with a good climate than in those with a poor one. The differences between ICUs with an average climate, with (n = 12, 18%) or without (n = 20, 29%) nursing involvement at the end of life, and ICUs with a poor climate were less obvious but still in favour of the former.ConclusionEnhancing the quality of the ethical climate in the ICU may improve both the identification of patients receiving excessive care and the decision-making process at the end of life.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-018-5231-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The 32-item version of the EDMCQ might enrich the EDM climate measurement, clinicians' behaviour and the performance of healthcare organisations. This instrument offers opportunities to develop tailored ICU team interventions.

Purpose: Apart from organizational issues, quality of inter-professional collaboration during ethical decision-making may affect the intention to leave one's job. To determine whether ethical climate is associated with the intention to leave after adjustment for country, ICU and clinicians characteristics.Methods: Perceptions of the ethical climate among clinicians working in 68 adult ICUs in 12 European countries and the US were measured using a self-assessment questionnaire, together with job characteristics and intent to leave as a sub-analysis of the Dispropricus study. The validated ethical decision-making climate questionnaire included seven factors: not avoiding decision-making at end-of-life (EOL), mutual respect within the interdisciplinary team, open interdisciplinary reflection, ethical awareness, self-reflective physician leadership, active decision-making at end-of-life by physicians, and involvement of nurses in EOL. Hierarchical mixed effect models were used to assess associations between these factors, and the intent to leave in clinicians within ICUs, within the different countries.Results: Of 3610 nurses and 1137 physicians providing ICU bedside care, 63.1% and 62.9% participated, respectively. Of 2992 participating clinicians, 782 (26.1%) had intent to leave, of which 27% nurses, 24% junior and 22.7% senior physicians. After adjustment for country, ICU and clinicians characteristics, mutual respect OR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.90), open interdisciplinary reflection (OR 0.73 [95% CI 0.62-0.86]) and not avoiding EOL decisions (OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77-0.98]) were all associated with a lower intent to leave.

Background ICU survivorship includes a diverse burden of disease. Current questionnaires used for collecting information about health-related problems and their relation to quality of life lack detailed questions in several areas relevant to ICU survivors. Our aim was to construct a provisional questionnaire on health-related issues based on interviews with ICU survivors and to test if this questionnaire was able to show differences between ICU survivors and a control group. Methods Thirty-two ICU survivors were identified at a post-ICU clinic and interviewed at least six months after ICU discharge. Using an established qualitative methodology from oncology, all dysfunctions and disabilities were extracted, rephrased as questions and compiled into a provisional questionnaire. In a second part, this questionnaire was tested on ICU survivors and controls. Inclusion criteria for the ICU survivors were ICU stay at least 72 h with ICU discharge six months to three years prior to the study. A non-ICU-treated control group was obtained from the Swedish Population Register, matched for age and sex. Eligible participants received an invitation letter and were contacted by phone. If willing to participate, they were sent the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were applied. Results Analysis of the interviews yielded 238 questions in 13 domains: cognition, fatigue, physical health, pain, psychological health, activities of daily living, sleep, appetite and alcohol, sexual health, sensory functions, gastrointestinal functions, urinary functions and work life. In the second part, 395 of 518 ICU survivors and 197 of 231 controls returned a completed questionnaire, the response rates being 76.2% and 85.3%, respectively. The two groups differed significantly in 13 of 22 comorbidities. ICU survivors differed in a majority of questions (p ≤ 0.05) distributed over all 13 domains compared with controls. Conclusions This study describes the development of a provisional questionnaire to identify health-related quality of life issues and long-term burden of disease after intensive care. The questionnaire was answered by 395 ICU survivors. The questionnaire could identify that they experience severe difficulties in a wide range of domains compared with a control group. Trial registry ClinicalTrials.gov Ref# NCT 02767180

Background There is increasing evidence that the individual physician is the main factor influencing variability in end‐of‐life decision‐making in intensive care units. End‐of‐life decisions are complex and should be adapted to each patient. Physician‐related variability is problematic as it may result in unequal assessments that affect patient outcomes. The primary aim of this study was to investigate factors contributing to physician‐related variability in end‐of‐life decision‐making. Method This is a qualitative substudy of a previously conducted study. In‐depth thematic analysis of semistructured interviews with 19 critical care specialists from five different Swedish intensive care units was performed. Interviews took place between 1 February 2017 and 31 May 2017. Results Factors influencing physician‐related variability consisted of different assessment of patient preferences, as well as intensivists' personality and values. Personality was expressed mainly through pace and determination in the decision‐making process. Personal prejudices appeared in decisions, but few respondents had personally witnessed this. Avoidance of criticism and conflicts as well as individual strategies for emotional coping were other factors that influenced physician‐related variability. Many respondents feared criticism for making their assessments, and the challenging nature of end‐of‐life decision‐making lead to avoidance as well as emotional stress. Conclusion Variability in end‐of‐life decision‐making is an important topic that needs further investigation. It is imperative that such variability be acknowledged and addressed in a more formal and transparent manner. The ethical issues faced by intensivists have recently been compounded by the devastating impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic, demonstrating in profound terms the importance of the topic.

Considering international variation in mortality when designing or interpreting results from multinational trauma studies is important. Significant differences in mortality persisted between patients from different countries after case mix and case management adjustment. Adherence to clinical guidelines was associated with improved survival. Stratification, case mix adjustment, and use of guidelines on damage control surgery, transfusion, and ventilation may mitigate country-driven variation in mortality.

No abstract

No abstract