BACKGROUND: Withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in end-of-life patients is a challenging ethical issue faced by physicians. Understanding physicians\' experiences and factors influencing their decisions can lead to improvement in end-of-life care.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the experiences of Thai physicians when making decisions regarding the withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments in end-of-life situations. Additionally, the study aims to assess the consensus among physicians regarding the factors that influence these decisions and to explore the influence of families or surrogates on the decision-making process of physicians, utilizing case-based surveys.
METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted among physicians practicing in Chiang Mai University Hospital (June - October 2022).
RESULTS: Among 251 physicians (response rate 38.3%), most of the respondents (60.6%) reported that they experienced withholding or withdrawal treatment in end-of-life patients. Factors that influence their decision-making include patient\'s preferences (100%), prognosis (93.4%), patients\' quality of life (92.8%), treatment burden (89.5%), and families\' request (87.5%). For a chronic disease with comatose condition, the majority of the physicians (47%) chose to continue treatments, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In contrast, only 2 physicians (0.8%) would do everything, in cases when families or surrogates insisted on stopping the treatment. This increased to 78.1% if the families insisted on continuing treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments are common in Thailand. The key factors influencing their decision-making process included patient\'s preferences and medical conditions and families\' requests. Effective communication and early engagement in advanced care planning between physicians, patients, and families empower them to align treatment choices with personal values.

Ethical questions surrounding withdrawal of life support can be complex. When life support therapies are the result of a suicide attempt, the potential ethical issues take on another dimension. Duties and principles that normally guide clinicians\' actions as caregivers may not apply as easily. We present a case of attempted suicide in which decisions surrounding withdrawal of life support provoked conflict between a patient\'s family and the medical team caring for him. We highlight the major unresolved philosophical questions and contradictory normative values about suicide that underlie this conflict. Finally, we show how these considerations were practically applied to this particular case.

BACKGROUND: Advances in emergency and critical care have improved outcomes, but gaps in communication and decision-making persist, especially in the emergency department (ED), prompting the development of a checklist to aid in serious illness conversations (SIC) in China.
METHODS: This was a single-centre prospective interventional study on the quality improvement of SIC for life-sustaining treatment (LST). The study recruited patients consecutively for both its observational baseline and interventional stages until its conclusion. Eligible participants were adults over 18 years old admitted to the Emergency Intensive Care Unit (EICU) of a tertiary teaching hospital, possessing full decisional capacity or having a legal proxy. Exclusions were made for pregnant women, patients deceased upon arrival, those who refused participation, and individuals with incomplete data for analysis. First, a two-round Delphi process was organized to identify major elements and generate a standard process through a checklist. Subsequently, the efficacy of SIC in adult patients admitted to the EICU was compared using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) score before (baseline group) and after (intervention group) implementing the checklist.
RESULTS: The study participants presented with the most common comorbidities, such as diabetes, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, moderate-to-severe renal disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic pulmonary disease. The median Charlson Index did not differ between the baseline and intervention cohorts. The median length of hospital stay was 11.0 days, and 82.9% of patients survived until hospital discharge. The total DCS score was lower in the intervention group than in the baseline group. Three subscales, including the informed, values clarity, and support subscales, demonstrated significant differences between the intervention and baseline groups. Fewer intervention group patients agreed with and changed their minds about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) compared to the baseline group.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of a SIC checklist in the EICU reduced the DCS score by increasing medical information disclosure, patient value awareness, and decision-making support.

The medical progress has produced improvements in critically ill patients\' survival to early phases of life-threatening diseases, thus producing long intensive care stays and persisting disability, with uncertain long-term survival rates and quality of life. Thus, compassionate end-of-life care and the provision of palliative care, even overlapping with the most aggressive of curative intensive care unit (ICU) care has become crucial. Moreover, withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatment may be adopted, allowing unavoidable deaths to occur, without prolonging agony or ICU stay. Our aim was to summarize the key element of end-of-life care in the ICU and the ethics of withholding/withdrawal life-sustaining treatments.

Like most complex aspects of procedural care, sound perioperative management of limits to life-sustaining medical therapy requires a multidisciplinary team-based approach bolstered by appropriate care management strategies. This article discusses the implications of care for the patient for whom limitations of life-sustaining care are in place and the roles and responsibilities of each provider in supporting quality procedural care compatible with patients\' right to self-determination. The authors focus on the roles of the surgeon, preoperative clinic provider, anesthesiologist, and postoperative care consultants and discuss how the health care system and care pathways can support and improve adherence to best practices.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST) decisions for critically injured trauma patients are complicated and multifactorial, with potential for patients\' insurance status to affect decision-making.
UNASSIGNED: To determine if patient insurance type (private insurance, Medicaid, and uninsured) is associated with time to WLST in critically injured adults cared for at US trauma centers.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective registry-based cohort study included reported data from level I and level II trauma centers in the US that participated in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) registry. Participants included adult trauma patients who were injured between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020, and required an intensive care unit stay. Patients were excluded if they died on arrival or in the emergency department or had a preexisting do not resuscitate directive. Analyses were performed on December 12, 2023.
UNASSIGNED: Insurance type (private insurance, Medicaid, uninsured).
UNASSIGNED: An adjusted time-to-event analysis for association between insurance status and time to WLST was performed, with analyses accounting for clustering by hospital.
UNASSIGNED: This study included 307 731 patients, of whom 160 809 (52.3%) had private insurance, 88 233 (28.6%) had Medicaid, and 58 689 (19.1%) were uninsured. The mean (SD) age was 40.2 (14.1) years, 232 994 (75.7%) were male, 59 551 (19.4%) were African American or Black patients, and 201 012 (65.3%) were White patients. In total, 12 962 patients (4.2%) underwent WLST during their admission. Patients who are uninsured were significantly more likely to undergo earlier WLST compared with those with private insurance (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.46-1.62) and Medicaid (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.39-1.55). This finding was robust to sensitivity analysis excluding patients who died within 48 hours of presentation and after accounting for nonwithdrawal death as a competing risk.
UNASSIGNED: In this cohort study of US adult trauma patients who were critically injured, patients who were uninsured underwent earlier WLST compared with those with private or Medicaid insurance. Based on our findings, patient\'s ability to pay was may be associated with a shift in decision-making for WLST, suggesting the influence of socioeconomics on patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Aim: To assess the impact of multidisciplinary simulation training on the educational outcomes of medical students in the emergency care of adults and newborns and implement changes in the curriculum to master simulation scenarios more.
METHODS: Materials and Methods: To assess the differences in learning outcomes between medical students who study the same curriculum without simulation interventions and those who undergo multidisciplinary emergency care simulation training. A quasi-experimental approach was used to assign students to the Intervention Group or the Control Group.
RESULTS: Results: According to individual criteria, the lowest scores in both groups were obtained for the stages that required the greatest accuracy and correct technique. After the appropriate cycle of initiation, the results in both groups improved significantly, but the results of students from the first group were significantly higher than those of students from the second group. Despite the absence of a significant difference in the average overall score for the skills, students in the first group significantly improved the accuracy and correctness of the criteria that assess the technical aspects of performance, while students in the second group mainly improved the quality of the descriptive and communicative parts of the practical skill.
CONCLUSIONS: Conclusions: We believe that reallocating curricular time to additional hours dedicated to simulation scenarios will better prepare aspiring healthcare professionals for the demanding and dynamic nature of their career, as we continue to increase our understanding of the potential of simulation-based education.

UNASSIGNED: Nielsen FM, Klitgaard TL, Siegemund M, et al; HOT-COVID Trial Group. Lower vs higher oxygenation target and days alive without life support in COVID-19: the HOT-COVID randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2024;331:1185-1194. 38501214.

Moral distress can impact nurses and the care team significantly. A profession dedicated to the principles of caring and compassion is often subjected to patients receiving futile treatment. With the proliferation of extreme life-prolonging measures come the difficulties in the withdrawal of those medical modalities. If a prognosis is poor and care is perceived as curative rather than palliative, providers may often feel conflicted and distressed by their interventions. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing has expressed growing concern about an increase in the use of inappropriate life-support treatments related to futile care. The compelling case of a severely beaten 69-year-old homeless man who had cardiac-arrested and was resuscitated after an unknown amount of down-time, provides the contextual framework for this report. Ethical conflicts can become very challenging, which inevitably increases the suffering of the patient and their caregivers. Research findings suggest that health care organizations can benefit from enacting processes that make ethical considerations an early and routine part of everyday clinical practice. A proactive approach to ethical conflicts may improve patient care outcomes and decrease moral distress.