López RT, Morales CI

Language: Spanish
References: 37
Page: 154-162
PDF size: 156.13 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Technological advances allow the care of patients with complex diseases in critical care medicine. Many of these patients will not benefit from treatment, generating high demand for services and high expenses in their care, which cannot be justified; thus emerging ethical controversies. The limitation of therapeutic effort (LTE) prevents the administration of futile treatments in patients with poor prognosis and/or in the final stage of their lives. Objective: To assess the frequency of treatments perceived as futile in critically ill adult patients and the prevalence of LTE candidates. Study design: Observational, descriptive and transversal. Methodology: We surveyed daily the critical care health staff (PSAMEC) on their perception of futile treatments in LTE candidates until their discharge of Critical Care Medicine. Results: The prevalence of LTE candidates was 8% (23 patients); only 14 (60.8%) of them agreed to LTE. The placement of tubes, drains and/or central venous catheter was higher in the “agreed to LTE” group, and the use of hemodialysis was higher in the “refused LTE” group, both statistically significant. Conclusion: It is necessary to continue spreading the concept of LTE in and out of the critical care services.

REFERENCES

1. Organización Mundial de la Salud. http://www.who.int. [Online]; 2012 [Consultado el 10 de Octubre del 2013. Disponible en: http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/ageing/es/index.html.

2. Partida Bush V. http://www.portal.conapo.gob.mx/. [Online]; 2006 [Consultado el Octubre de 13 del 2013. Disponible en: http://www.portal.conapo.gob.mx/00cifras/proy/Proy05-50.pdf.

3. Connors AF, Dawson NV, Desbiens NA, Fulkerson WJ et al. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients: the study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments (SUPPORT). JAMA. 1995; 274 (20): 1591-1598.

4. Angus D, Barnato A, Linde-Zwirble W, Weissfeld L et al. Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an epidemiologic study. Crit Care Med. 2004; 32 (3): 638-643.

5. Weeks J, Cook E, O’Day S, Peterson L et al. Relationship between cancer patients’ predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences. JAMA. 1998; 279 (21): 1709-1714.

6. Esserman L, Belkora J, Lenert L. Potentially ineffective care. A new outcome to assess the limits of critical care. JAMA. 1995; 274 (19): 1544-1551.

7. Huynh T, Kleerup E, Wiley J, Savitsky T et al. The frequency and cost of treatment perceived to be futile in critical care. JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173 (20): 1887-1894.

8. Azoulay E, Pochard F, Chevret S, Adrie C et al. Half the family members of intensive care unit patients do not want to share in decision-making process: a study in 78 French intensive care units. Crit Care Med. 2004; 32 (9): 1832-1838.

9. Gerstel E, Engelberg R, Koepsell T, Curtis J. Duration of withdrawal of life support in the intensive care unit and association with family satisfaction. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008; 8 (8): 798-804.

10. Kite S, Wilkinson S. Beyond futility: to what extent is the concept of futility useful in clinical decision-making about CPR? Lancet Oncol. 2002; 3 (10): 638-642.

11. Kasman D. When is medical treatment futile? A guide for students, residents, and physicians. J Gen Intern Med. 2004; 19 (10): 1053-1056.

12. Herrerosa B, Palaciosa G, Pacho E. Limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico. Rev Clin Esp. 2012; 212 (3): 134-140.

13. Weijer C, Elliott C. Pulling the plug on futility. BMJ. 1995; 310 (6981): 683-684.

14. Raffin T. Withdrawing life support. How is the decision made? JAMA. 1995; 273 (9): 738-739.

15. Sanz Ortiz J. Can we manage the dying process? Advance directives. Med Clin (Barc). 2006; 126 (16): 620-623.

16. Gill B, Griffin B, Hesketh B et al. Changing expectations concerning life-extending treatment: The relevance of opportunity cost. Social Science & Medicine. 2013; 85: 66-73.

17. Cabré P, Solsona D. Limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico en medicina intensiva. Med Intensiva. 2002; 26 (6): 304-311.

18. Gutiérrez J, Casabona C, Gijón P, Júdez J. Limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico. Med Clin (Barc). 2001; 117: 586-594.

19. Esteban A, Gordon F, Solsona J, Alia I et al. Withdrawing and withholding life support in the intensive care unit: a Spanish prospective multi-centre observational study. Intensive Care Med. 2001; 27 (11): 1744-1749.

20. Smedira N, Evans B, Grais L, Cohen N, et al. Withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. N Engl J Med. 1990; 322 (5): 309-315.

21. Prendergast T, Luce J. Increasing incidence of withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997; 155 (1): 15-20.

22. Cook D, Guyatt G, Jaeschke R, Reeve J et al. Determinants in Canadian health care workers of the decision to withdraw life support from the critically ill. Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. JAMA. 1995; 273 (9): 703-708.

23. Palda VA, Bowman KW, McLean RF, Chapman MG. “Futile” care: do we provide it? Why? A semistructured, Canada-wide survey of intensive care unit doctors and nurses. J Crit Care. 2005; 20: 207-213.

24. Sibbald J, Downar J, Hawryluck L. Perceptions of “futile care” among caregivers in intensive care units. CMAJ. 2007; 177 (10): 1201-1208.

25. Rodríguez MV, Pizaña DA, Morales CI. Experiencia en cuidados al final de la vida en la Unidad de Medicina Crítica del Hospital Ángeles Mocel. Acta Médica Grupo Ángeles. 2012; 10 (4): 170-175.

26. Vincent JL. Forgoing life support in western European intensive care units: the results of an ethical questionnaire. Critical Care Medicine. 1999; 27: 1626-1633.

27. Neu S, Kjellstrand CM. Stopping long-term dialysis. N Engl J Med. 1986; (314): 14-20.

28. US Renal Data System. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. US Renal Data System Annual Data Report 2007. Bethesda, MD; 2007

29. Renal Physician Association. Shared decision-making in the appropriate initiation of and withdrawal from dialysis. Clinical Practice Guideline. Rockville: October; 2010.

30. Yamada R, Morita T, Otani E, Amano H et al. Patient-reported usefulness of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in terminally ill cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010; 40 (1): 60-66.

31. Farrington N, Richardson A, Fader M. indwelling urinary catheter use in end of life care at University Hospitals Southampton NHS Foundation Trust. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2014; 4: A58-A59.

32. Laval G, Marcelin-Benazech B, Guirimand F, Chauvenet L et al. Recommendations for bowel obstruction with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2014; 48 (1): 75-91.

33. Issaka RB, Shapiro DM, Parikh ND, Mulcahy MF et al. Palliative venting percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube is safe and effective in patients with malignant obstruction. Surg Endosc. 2014; 28 (5): 1668-1673.

34. Ferraro F, Graviana AG, D’Ella A. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for critically ill patients in a general intensive care unit. Acta Gastroenterol Belg. 2013; 76 (3): 306-310.

35. Davies HE, Mishra EK, Kahan BC, Wrightson JM et al. Effect of an indwelling pleural catheter versus chest tube and talc pleurodesis for relieving dyspnea in patients with malignant pleural effusion the TIME2 randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2012; 307 (22): 2383-2389.

36. Gillen J, Lau C. Permanent indwelling catheters in the management of pleural effusions. Thoracic Surgery Clinics. 2013; 23 (1): 63-71.

37. Freeman RK. Propensity-matched comparison of pleurodesis or tunneled pleural catheter for heart failure patients with recurrent pleural effusion. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014; 97 (6): 1872-1876