Age and life-sustaining treatment. Attitudes of intensive care unit professionals.
cross_sectional · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 8908226.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
In Sweden, the official policy is that life-sustaining treatment should not be denied because of chronological age. This policy is also emphasised in a recent official report on priority setting in health care. But is this policy accepted among health care professionals? Do they consider chronological age relevant when decisions to forgo life-sustaining treatment are to be made? Questionnaire survey to physicians, registered nurses and enrolled nurses at the Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital MAS, Malmö, Sweden. More than 65% of the respondents were of the opinion that chronological age per se influenced decisions about life-sustaining treatment. Fewer, a little more than 40%, answered that it would make a difference to their own judgment about life-sustaining treatment whether the patient is 25 or 75 years old. The respondents were also confronted with 10 different factors characterising patients in need of life-sustaining treatment. According to a majority, advance directive, decision-making capacity, and chronological age should be taken into consideration in these situations. The results indicate that chronological age is used as a criterion when decisions to forgo life-sustaining treatment are to be made in the ICU. Many health care professionals also believe that chronological age should be used as a criterion. This is clearly discordant with the official policy in Sweden and other countries, which is that age-based rationing is never justified.
Medical subject headings
- Age Factors
- Attitude of Health Personnel
- Intensive Care Units
- Life Support Care
- Medical Staff, Hospital