6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      End-of-Life Decisions in Intensive Care Units in Croatia—Pre COVID-19 Perspectives and Experiences From Nurses and Physicians

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Healthcare professionals working in intensive care units (ICUs) are often involved in end-of-life decision-making. No research has been done so far about these processes taking place in Croatian ICUs. The aim of this study was to investigate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges healthcare professionals face when dealing with end-of-life decisions in ICUs in Croatia. A qualitative study was performed using professionally homogenous focus groups of ICU nurses and physicians (45 in total) of diverse professional and clinical backgrounds at three research sites (Zagreb, Rijeka, Split). In total, six institutions at the tertiary level of healthcare were included. The constant comparative analysis method was used in the analysis of the data. Differences were found between the perceptions and experiences of nurses and physicians in relation to end-of-life decisions. Nurses’ perceptions were more focused on the context and features of immediate care, while physicians’ perceptions also included the wider sociocultural context. However, the critical issues these specific professional groups face when dealing with end-of-life decisions seem to overlap. A high variability of practices, both between individual practitioners and between different organizational units, was omnipresent. The lack of adequate legal, professional, and clinical guidelines was commonly expressed as one of the most critical source of difficulties.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Prevalence of Compassion Fatigue and Burnout among Healthcare Professionals in Intensive Care Units: A Systematic Review

          Background Working in the stressful environment of the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is an emotionally charged challenge that might affect the emotional stability of medical staff. The quality of care for ICU patients and their relatives might be threatened through long-term absenteeism or a brain and skill drain if the healthcare professionals leave their jobs prematurely in order to preserve their own health. Purpose The purpose of this review is to evaluate the literature related to emotional distress among healthcare professionals in the ICU, with an emphasis on the prevalence of burnout and compassion fatigue and the available preventive strategies. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted, using Embase, Medline OvidSP, Cinahl, Web-of-science, PsychINFO, PubMed publisher, Cochrane and Google Scholar for articles published between 1992 and June, 2014. Studies reporting the prevalence of burnout, compassion fatigue, secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma in ICU healthcare professionals were included, as well as related intervention studies. Results Forty of the 1623 identified publications, which included 14,770 respondents, met the selection criteria. Two studies reported the prevalence of compassion fatigue as 7.3% and 40%; five studies described the prevalence of secondary traumatic stress ranging from 0% to 38.5%. The reported prevalence of burnout in the ICU varied from 0% to 70.1%. A wide range of intervention strategies emerged from the recent literature search, such as different intensivist work schedules, educational programs on coping with emotional distress, improving communication skills, and relaxation methods. Conclusions The true prevalence of burnout, compassion fatigue, secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma in ICU healthcare professionals remains open for discussion. A thorough exploration of emotional distress in relation to communication skills, ethical rounds, and mindfulness might provide an appropriate starting point for the development of further preventive strategies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ethics and end-of-life care for adults in the intensive care unit.

            The intensive care unit (ICU) is where patients are given some of the most technologically advanced life-sustaining treatments, and where difficult decisions are made about the usefulness of such treatments. The substantial regional variability in these ethical decisions is a result of many factors, including religious and cultural beliefs. Because most critically ill patients lack the capacity to make decisions, family and other individuals often act as the surrogate decision makers, and in many regions communication between the clinician and family is central to decision making in the ICU. Elsewhere, involvement of the family is reduced and that of the physicians is increased. End-of-life care is associated with increased burnout and distress among clinicians working in the ICU. Since many deaths in the ICU are preceded by a decision to withhold or withdraw life support, high-quality decision making and end-of-life care are essential in all regions, and can improve patient and family outcomes, and also retention of clinicians working in the ICU. To make such a decision requires adequate training, good communication between the clinician and family, and the collaboration of a well functioning interdisciplinary team. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Seeking worldwide professional consensus on the principles of end-of-life care for the critically ill. The Consensus for Worldwide End-of-Life Practice for Patients in Intensive Care Units (WELPICUS) study.

              Great differences in end-of-life practices in treating the critically ill around the world warrant agreement regarding the major ethical principles. This analysis determines the extent of worldwide consensus for end-of-life practices, delineates where there is and is not consensus, and analyzes reasons for lack of consensus. Critical care societies worldwide were invited to participate. Country coordinators were identified and draft statements were developed for major end-of-life issues and translated into six languages. Multidisciplinary responses using a web-based survey assessed agreement or disagreement with definitions and statements linked to anonymous demographic information. Consensus was prospectively defined as >80% agreement. Definitions and statements not obtaining consensus were revised based on comments of respondents, and then translated and redistributed. Of the initial 1,283 responses from 32 countries, consensus was found for 66 (81%) of the 81 definitions and statements; 26 (32%) had >90% agreement. With 83 additional responses to the original questionnaire (1,366 total) and 604 responses to the revised statements, consensus could be obtained for another 11 of the 15 statements. Consensus was obtained for informed consent, withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, legal requirements, intensive care unit therapies, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, shared decision making, medical and nursing consensus, brain death, and palliative care. Consensus was obtained for 77 of 81 (95%) statements. Worldwide consensus could be developed for the majority of definitions and statements about end-of-life practices. Statements achieving consensus provide standards of practice for end-of-life care; statements without consensus identify important areas for future research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                abor@mef.hr
                Journal
                J Bioeth Inq
                J Bioeth Inq
                Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
                Springer Singapore (Singapore )
                1176-7529
                1872-4353
                23 September 2021
                : 1-15
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.415389.2, ISNI 0000 0000 9487 9968, University Psychiatric Hospital Vrapče, ; Bolnička cesta 32, 10090 Zagreb, Croatia
                [2 ]GRID grid.4808.4, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 4636, School of Medicine, , University of Zagreb, ; Šalata 2, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
                [3 ]GRID grid.4808.4, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 4636, Department for Psychology, Faculty of Croatian Studies, , University of Zagreb, ; Borongajska cesta 83d, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
                [4 ]GRID grid.412688.1, ISNI 0000 0004 0397 9648, Department of Anesthesiology, Reanimatology and Intensive care, , University Hospital Center Zagreb, ; Kišpatićeva ulica 12, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
                [5 ]GRID grid.412210.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0397 736X, Department of Anesthesiology, , University Hospital Center Rijeka, ; Krešimirova ulica 42, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia
                [6 ]GRID grid.22939.33, ISNI 0000 0001 2236 1630, School of Medicine, , University of Rijeka, ; Ulica Braće Branchetta 20/1, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia
                [7 ]GRID grid.412721.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0366 9017, Department of Anesthesiology, , University Hospital Center Split, ; Spinčićeva ulica 1, 21000 Split, Croatia
                [8 ]GRID grid.38603.3e, ISNI 0000 0004 0644 1675, School of Medicine, , University of Split, ; Šoltanska ulica 2, 21000 Split, Croatia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8635-195X
                Article
                10128
                10.1007/s11673-021-10128-w
                8459337
                34554388
                1f400d13-d02b-4338-a3bb-657e464425dd
                © Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. 2021

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

                History
                : 14 January 2021
                : 16 July 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004488, Hrvatska Zaklada za Znanost;
                Award ID: IP-2016-06-2721
                Categories
                Original Research

                Ethics
                intensive care units,critical care,end-of-life,decision-making,nurses,physicians
                Ethics
                intensive care units, critical care, end-of-life, decision-making, nurses, physicians

                Comments

                Comment on this article